Peer-review

All articles published in the journal will be the double-blind reviewing in order to ensure qualitative scientific research. All articles submitted are normally sent to blind reviewers which are asked to maintain the quality standards of the journal.

The review is carried out by a Board of anonymous reviewers in which the Editorial Board has enrolled recognized scholars from different countries. External double-blind peer review of each of the presented paper is implemented. The name of the author from the text of the paper is erased (as well as from the file properties) and the received paper is consigned to two of the reviewers. During the evaluation process, they fill in a special review form and in its final part they mark their categorical opinion whether the received manuscript should be rejected or accepted (without corrections, with some necessary emendation and without second review, or with second review after the recommended necessary corrections have been done). The reviewers are obliged to send their reviews to the Editorial Board of the journal within 30 days. In case one of the two reviewers rejects the paper, it should be consigned for evaluation to an arbitrator whose positive evaluation is a necessary condition for continuation of the procedure.

After the submission of the review forms to the Editorial Board, the author is informed of the opinion of the reviewers and, if necessary, provides the final part of the review (Recommendations and overall evaluation) in order to make the needed emendations. The author should return the revised text of the article within two weeks. The name and the affiliation of the author are added to the text, and after that the article is preparation for publication. The Editorial Board has the right to reject the materials that do not conform to the purpose of the journal, its ethical rules and do not meet the requirements for publication.

PUBLISHER’S REVIEW

1. Instructions:
The journal observes the best academic standards and for that reason it considers the publication of articles as a creative process of cooperation between the author, the reviewers and the Editorial Board. The aim of the publisher’s review is to evaluate and develop the academic quality of the presented papers for publication. The constructive criticism is a necessary part of those processes because of which it should meet the standards of professional style.
The reviewers have to send the reviews to the Editorial Board of the journal within 30 days. If necessary, the reviewers can make notes directly on the text, using the option “Track Changes” in Word (it is valid when an electronic copy of the reviewed paper is presented) or directly on the text with a pen (pencil), keeping the symbols and rules for emendation and notes in case a hard copy of the reviewed material is presented.

2. Peer-review evaluation form:

Anuarul Institutului de Cercetări Socio-Umane „C.S. Nicolăescu-Plopșor”, Acadenia Română
“C.S. NICOLĂESCU-PLOPŞOR” INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH IN SOCIAL STUDIES AND HUMANITIES, ROMANIAN ACADEMY
68 UNIRII STREET, CRAIOVA, DOLJ
PHONE: 0251 523 330
E-MAIL: icsu.plopsor@npissh.ro

 PEER-REVIEW EVALUATION FORM

EDITORIAL BOARD
Reviewer’s name:
E-mail:
Title of manuscript:
Date sent to reviewer:
Date expected from reviewer:

REVIEWER

Reviewers are kindly asked to comment on the following sections of the evaluation form.
Grades such as Excellent, Very Good, Good, Fair or Poor are to be granted to specified sections.

SECTION I
A) GENERAL COMMENT ON THE SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT

B) SPECIFIC COMMENT REGARDING THE STRUCTURE
Please tick the appropriate box

SECTION II
SCIENTIFIC QUALITY OF THE SUBMITTED MATERIAL
At this section the reviewer is asked to grant rates (Excellent, Good, Fair or Poor) by marking the appropriate box with an X, on the following issues: