Submissions

Who can publish

Papers can be sent by researches, academics and professionals with interests related to socio-economic sciences. The main criteria considered by the reviewers are originality, novelty, potential to spark debate and coherent exposure. Documents submitted for publication will be examined by editors before being placed into the process of review.

Fields of interest:

Papers in area of Social Sciences including: General Social Sciences, Sociology and Political Science, Social Sciences (miscellaneous).

Requirements for publishing

The paper must be submitted in English, by e-mail, as attached Word file in a single document which will include all images and tables.
Minimum requirements must be met on the following:

• Size:the paper should contain a maximum of 15 pages including biography
• Paper title:should be concise and summarize the most appropriate contents of the paper
• File format:Microsoft Word
• Text format:Times New Roman 12, 1 line spacing
• Information about the author/ authors ( a maximum of 200 words):for each author it must be mentioned the academic title, current position, institution to which it belongs, contact details – telephone and e-mail. For the selected authors, all this information will be made public. The submission of a manuscript implies that the author certifies that the material is not copyrighted and is not currently under review for another publication. If the article has appeared or will appear in another publication, details of such publication must be disclosed to the editors at the time of submission.
• Abstract:will present shortly the purpose, field of application, research methods, results and conclusions of the paper. It should have a maximum of 250 words and will be written in English.
• Key-words:are designed to provide a rapid classification of the paper. The key-words must be written in English, separated by semicolon (;) and placed below the abstract.
• Tables:as simple as possible, with explanatory titles, numbered in the order they appear in the text. The source of the data must be mentioned below each table (Times New Roman 10, italic, aligned left).
• Graphs:should be made in Excel, in black and white and must be inserted and numbered in the order of appearance in the text. Each graph should have an explanatory title and the source of the data should be mentioned below the graph (Times New Roman 10, italic, aligned left).
• Footnotes:are inserted in the text and numbered with Arabic numbers. Their size should be reduced by bringing clarification on the text.

• References: should be cited as follows: the name of the author, year of the publication and page, all in parentheses (Ritzer and Goodman, 2003, p. 93) or if the name of the author is mentioned within a sentence it should be included as follows: ... Ritzer and Goodman (2003, p. 93). At a first citation containing from three to five authors, all names are mentioned, afterwards, it is used [the first author] "et al.". If more than one paper by the same author, from the same year is cited, the letters a, b, c etc. should included after the year of publication. The citation of a paper available online should be performed following the same rules as for a book or a magazine specifying the electronic address where it was consulted.
• Bibliography: the full list of the references cited in the text must be presented at the end of the paper, below annexes, in alphabetical order of the names of the authors and in a chronological order for a group of references by the same author. The order is the following: name of the author/ authors, year of appearance, title, publisher, city; for example:

Rea, A., Tripier, M., 2008, Sociologie de l'immigration, La Decouverte, Paris 

Koh, H. K. (2010). A 2020 vision for healthy people. New England Journal of Medicine, 362(18), 1653–1656

Peer Review Process

1. Peer review: Standards and description

1.1. Editorial evaluation

This is the first stage evaluation, in which the paper proposed for evaluation is assessed from the technical and administrative points of view. The evaluation is made by the editor, to identify whether the paper is related to the specificity of the journal and if it addresses subjects that are in direct connection with the current issue's topic. The editor will also assess if the author complies with the editorial requirements, such as the citation system, respecting the journal's technical parameters from the template available online, or the structure of the article.

Only after the technical requirements are fulfilled by the author will the paper be the subject of the peer review process and its scientific quality evaluated.

1.2. Scientific evaluation

After texts are analysed from the scientific point of view, reviewers communicate their decision and the observations/requirements (if any) as a condition of publication. The editor transmit the reviewers decision to the author and, if the reviewers agreed on the acceptance for publication but recommend changes of the text, it is sent back to the author to make changes. Once the requested changes are made, the text returns to the two reviewers of Publishing Committee to check the final version of the text and transmit their decision.

The scientific evaluation is completed in the following way: Blind peer review

The blind peer review process consists of assigning a blind manuscript (with no identification information of the author/s) to a reviewer whose identity is not known to the author whose paper is subject to evaluation, nor will be known by the author after the evaluation is completed. The correspondence between the reviewers/s and the author/s will be intermediated by the publisher.

The results of evaluation can be of the following types: acceptance, acceptance with modifications or rejected. If it is accepted with modifications, corrections will be asked for from the author.

        2. Ethical evaluation

Ethical evaluation follows two directions, namely Editorial Ethics and Research Ethics.

Regarding Editorial Ethics, these are analysed suspicions of plagiarism and the improper award of authorship (including authors who contributed to the text or research and the exclusion of authors who have contributed). They also track potential conflicts of interest that occurred after publication by EXPERT, the rights to reproduce images, text or republication rights fragments where appropriate. It is followed the avoidance of double funding requests when the volume of publicly-funded appearance.

The second direction aims of evaluation for respecting the ethical rules of scientific research where appropriate: the rules of data confidentiality; obtaining the agreement of person / persons interviewed or for which you have undertaken research included in the volume; in the protection of the interests of natural or legal persons, in order not to violate any image or other rights of nature provided by law.

Papers are reviewed by two specialists. Depending on their recommendations, the editors decide whether publish/ reject the paper or make suggestions for improvement to the author/ authors. The editors have the right to make minor editorial changes to submitted papers, including the correction of grammatical mistakes, punctuation and writing, as well as modify the format of the paper, but no major changes will be performed without the approval of the author. If major changes are needed, the paper is returned to the author for him to make the necessary changes. Authors are informed by e-mail on the status of the papers sent in no more than 6 weeks from their receipt.

Papers accepted for publication are sent to authors for good press. Authors are asked to respond to the editorial board within 7 days. Authors submitting papers to the editorial board implicitly declare their publishing agreement in these conditions.

NON-PLAGIARISM STATEMENT