Publication Ethics

Reviewing procedure

1. Each article submitted for publication in “Central European Journal of Communication” is peer-reviewed (double blind review).
2. During the first phase, decisions on acceptance or rejection are being made by Editor(s) and/or Guest Editor(s) of the issue. At this stage both Editor(s) and/or Guest Editor(s) may not accept papers which have not been prepared in accordance to APA Style.
3. In the second phase papers are circulated to two or more external referees.
4. Decision on acceptance or rejection is being made by Editor(s) and/or Guest Editor(s) on the outcomes of reviews. 
5. Reviews are anonymous and are carried out in a strict confidence. 
6. Reviews are not prepared by the Editors and/or Guest Editor(s) of a given issue. 
7. Reviews form includes opinions and suggestions on the Importance of the subject, quality of the paper (including article structure and clarity of expression), depths and strengths of arguments, originality of arguments, contribution to theory-building and the body of knowledge in media and communication studies. 
8. The possible referees’ decisions include acceptance, acceptance with revisions, or rejection. 
9. All contributors are informed about the decision made by the referees. Upon notification on acceptance and suggestions from referees all contributors are asked to deliver the final versions of their manuscripts in the next 14 days. Final versions of the manuscripts submitted after the deadline may not be accepted for publication.
10. Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.
11. The paper acceptance is constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. 
12. Submission of paper is equivalent with the statement that the manuscript is original and has not been published before (in English and/or other language) and/or is not being currently evaluated elsewhere.

Responsibilities of Authors

1. Authors must certify that their manuscripts are original work have been not published before (in English and/or in other language).
2. Authors must certify that the manuscript is not currently being evaluated for publication elsewhere. 
3. Submission of the article is equivalent to the contributor's statement to having the manuscript reviewed. 
4. Submission of manuscript is equivalent to the statement that the author is entitled to copyright to the manuscript, that the manuscript is free of legal defects. 
5. The contributor shall be responsible for securing any copyright waivers and permissions as may be needed to allow (re)publication of material in the manuscript (text, illustrations, etc.) that is the intellectual property of third parties. 
6. Submission is equivalent to permission for publication and dissemination of the manuscript (unlimited as to time and territory of distribution as well as to free copies and issues made available on the Internet). 
7. All Authors must have significantly contributed to the research. 
8. Authors must state that all data in the paper are real and authentic. 
9. All the sources quoted in the text shall be clearly identified. 
10. Authors are obliged to provide retractions for the outcomes of the review and, in the case of acceptance, provide corrections of mistakes. 
11. The Authors must react to final proofs being sent in PDF file prior to publication. 
12.  Authors must notify the Editors of any conflicts of interest.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

1. Every form of external pressure during the review procedure is prohibited; there should be no conflict of interest between the referee and the author.
2. Both referee and the author should not remain in close personal or professional relationships (including family relations, institutional affiliations, collaborative research projects connected with the paper). 
3. Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information. 
4. Manuscripts shall not be discussed with its authors either during the review procedure or at any time previous to its actual publication. 
5. Recommendation by referees shall end up with a clear conclusion: Accept as it stands, accept (subject to revisions), decline.  
6. Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism of the author.
7. Reviewers should also call to the Editor(s)' and/or Guest Editor(s)' attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge. 
8. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Responsibilities of Editors

1. Editors have complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article.
2. Editors are responsible for the contents and overall quality of the publication. 
3. Editors should base their decisions solely on importance of the subject, quality of the paper (including article structure and clarity of expression), depths and strengths of arguments, originality of arguments, contribution to theory-building and the body of knowledge in media and communication studies. 
4. Editors should preserve the anonymity of reviewers. 
5. Editors should ensure that all research material they publish conforms to the ethical guidelines. 
6. Editors should act if they suspect misconduct, whether a paper is published or unpublished, and make all reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem. 
7. Editors shall be responsible for meeting the publication deadlines and collaborate with the publishing house at each stages of the reviewing procedures. 
8. Editors should not allow any conflicts of interest between staff, authors, reviewers and board members.