Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement requirements

The editorial policy of the “DIALOGICA. Cultural Studies and Literature Scientific Journal” complies with international good editorial practice Guidelines and standards of the COPE (Publication Ethics Committee), to achieve a high publication culture.

The editorial board assumes responsibility for respecting and complying with the standards of publication ethics and behaviour at all stages of review and publication. To this end, the same method of submission and verification of manuscripts, peer review and interpersonal communication shall apply as in international scientific journals. Only articles containing original contributions, excluding plagiarism, multiple editing, errors and scientific falsifications will be accepted.


Rights and responsibilities of the author

The author bears moral responsibility for published articles. From the moment the article are submitted for the journal’s editorial board, the author sends to it the right to reproduce it, the right to distribute the original, the right to place in the interactive (on-line) regime.

The author is responsible for the quality of the article, for the scientific novelty and originality of the article, its correspondence with the editorial policy and the concept of the journal; the appropriate wording of the title of the article, the concordance with the content and the bibliographical references; relevance of abstract and keywords; scientific quality, compliance with the structure of a scientific article, coherence of methodology and proper use of theoretical language, theoretical interpretation and analysis, critical involvement of the author, argumentation of purpose and conclusions, relevance of the sources and bibliographical references, stylistic and graphic presentation of the article.

The responsibility for the opinions expressed in the pages of the journal belongs to the authors. Articles already published in other journals are not allowed. To counter plagiarism and duplicate publication, articles are verified by placing the title, keywords and snippets of text on the internet. This task also lies in the work of expert reviewers. Authors retain without restriction the copyright on articles and grant the journal the right to first publish.

The responsibility for the original character of the published text lies with the author. In this regard, the author signs a Statement of Ethics on his own responsibility, declaring the original nature of the article, the lack of plagiarism and duplicate publication.

The author will have a decision-making transparency and a respectful treatment from the editor, who will inform him about the objections and suggestions made by the reviewers and the editorial board.

In order to respect the copyright, the author will sign with the editor an Agreement for the transfer of the patrimonial rights of the author, provided by art. 11 a), b), c), i) of Law no. 139 of 02.07.2010 on copyright and related rights.

If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in an article of his that has been published in “DIALOGICA”, he has the obligation to immediately notify the editorial board to correct the article.

The editorial board of the “Dialogica” will follow the strict observance of the review procedure, which will be colegial, anonymous and objective.

The editorial board is responsible for organizing the review process of each article.

Articles received for publication in “DIALOGICA” magazine are subject to evaluation in the “double blind” peer review system, respecting international standards of scientific journals.

All submitted article to the editorial staff receives a registration number, is verified by plagiarism and duplicate publication, then sent for review to two experts, selected from the databases of the State University “Dimitrie Cantemir” and Department of Social, Economic, Humanities Sciences and Arts Section of the Academy of Sciences of Moldova, depending on the field of research.

The editor ensures the anonymity of the review. The authors do not know the identity of the experts, and the experts do not know the identity of the authors. The editorial board transmits to the authors the objections and suggestions of the reviewers, meant to improve the scientific quality of the article.

The term of review is at least six months.

The results of the review are discussed at the meetings of the editorial board. The article is accepted for publication if it corresponds to one of these options:

  • Both reviewers give a positive opinion and recommend it for publication;
  • If one of the reviewers gives a negative opinion, the article is sent for review to a third reviewer. Based on the opinion of this third reviewer, the editorial board makes a decision.

Articles received by the editorial staff will be treated as confidential documents. The members of the editorial board and the reviewers will keep the data and scientific results of the article secret and will not use it in their own interest. Situations in which the reviewer is in a conflict of interest or in competition with the author of the article are not allowed.

If the author improves his rejected article, the procedure is resumed.

Papers that do not comply with the rules of the editorial policy of Scientific Ethics will not be accepted.


Rights and responsibilities of the Editor

The Editor assumes responsibility to organize the review process. The editor will communicate with the author at all stages of review and drafting to improve the quality of the article. The editor will receive the author’s confirmation of any changes made to the article prior to publication.

The editor has the final responsibility to decide whether an article will be published or not in “DIALOGICA” magazine, taking into account the evaluations made by scientific references, due compliance with the provisions of this ”Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement requirements” and the legislation regarding copyright protection. The editor may consult with the other members of the Editorial Board, as well as with scientific references in making publication decisions.

The editor rejects the papers that do not correspond to the norms of the editorial policy of the Scientific Ethics. In this case, the editor will send the author a motivational refusal. Rejection of an article will not be a pretext for subsequent non-cooperation with the author. If the author improves his rejected article, it can be published.

if(function_exists('coauthors_posts_links')) coauthors_posts_links(); else the_author_posts_link();