Submissions | journal

Submission Preparation Checklist

As part of the submission process, authors are required to check off their submission's compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.
The manuscript is sent via e-mail to irinstatunascendi@yahoo.com
The submission has not been previously published, nor is it under consideration by another journal.
The submission files are in Microsoft Word format.
The text adheres to the stylistic and bibliographic requirements outlined in the Paper Submission Guidelines.

Manuscripts for publication are considered on a continuous basis, with two deadlines for review rounds set for 30th June, and 31st December each year. The evaluation of manuscripts submitted shortly after one of these deadlines is likely to take longer than when submitted before the deadline. All manuscripts should respect the formal structure and requirements stated in the Author Guidelines.

Editorial Board Evaluation may result in desk rejection (communicated to the authors with a brief justification) or acceptance of the submission to the main, double-blind external peer-review process performed by reviewers not affiliated with the Editorial Board members and the authors. The results of the peer review (publish, publish with minor revisions, revise and resubmit or reject) are then communicated to the authors.

Required Submission Format

A good academic paper features:

Academic style of writing and structure;
Grammatically correct language;
Consistency in language conventions (e.g. usage British English) and grammatical person (e.g. usage of either first or third person singular, eventually first-person plural, also depending on the number of authors of the paper);
Between 3,000 and 8,000 words, without bibliography and appendices

Required Formatting of References

Reference formatting should adhere to the Chicago Manual of Style (author-date variant), 14th Edition. Most major citation managers (such as Zotero) include this referencing style among their options.

Title
Abstract - Explaining research question, original parts of research, an overview of the used methodology, and conclusion.
Keywords
Introduction comprises an explanation of what is the research question and why should academics research it, scientific and societal relevance.
Literature review (optional) explaining what has been written on the topic previously, and what conclusions did others reach. Explanation of what theoretical framework and approach are used and why. If applicable, a causal model may be shown at this point, or later, after data investigation.
Conceptualization and operationalization (optional)
Definition of basic terms and their indicators, choice of variables, and their validity testing. Formulation of hypotheses (explicit or implicit) based on the theory/theories. Elaboration of the specific claim(s) in the investigated theory/theories. If applicable, description of the causal mechanism, i.e. the chain of events purported to link your explanatory variables to the specific outcome (recommended)
Methodology (recommended)
Description of the specific research method used (i.e., process-tracing, discursive analysis, MLA, etc.), its advantages and weaknesses, and why it is chosen.
Description of the data used, number of cases, method of case selection, source of data, method of data collection, sampling method.
Analysis and findings. What the data show in detail, general tendencies, and interesting particularities.
Conclusions or Discussions
Causal models may be formulated and general conclusions reached. Conclusions may or may not specifically challenge or support findings in the existing literature.
Future research
Possibilities of future research for the researcher or other scholars, promising directions, and requirements for future research.
List of References (Bibliography) structured in the required format.

Note on Plagiarism

Plagiarism is not acceptable. Plagiarized content will not be considered for publication. If plagiarism is identified, we will follow COPE guidelines.
Authors, editors, and reviewers are expected to be aware of and comply with, best practices in publication ethics. Authors are expected to be aware of and comply with, best practices in publication ethics specifically but not limited to authorship, dual submission, plagiarism, manipulation of figures, competing interests, and compliance with policies on research ethics. Details are provided below or in related documents. Reviewers and editors are required to treat manuscripts fairly and in confidence, and to declare any competing interests. We will vigorously investigate allegations of research or publication misconduct and we reserve the right to contact authors’ institutions, funders, or regulatory bodies if needed.
In cases of suspected or alleged misconduct, we will follow the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) flowcharts and may also seek advice at the COPE Forum. If we find conclusive evidence of misconduct we will take steps to correct the scientific record, which may include issuing a correction or retraction. If you have any concerns about potential misconduct, please email the journal’s Editor-in-Chief or any member of the Editorial Board or International Committee
Plagiarism includes, but is not limited to:
1.) Directly copying text from other sources without attribution.
2.) Copying ideas, images, or data from other sources without attribution.
3.) Reusing text from your own previous publications without attribution or agreement of the editor (read the COPE guidelines on text recycling).
4.) Exception: Reusing text from the Methods section in the author’s previous publications, with attribution to the source, is acceptable.
5.) Using an idea from another source with slightly modified language without attribution

Privacy Statement
The names and email addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.