Ethical codex

CrSNDT Journal
Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

(download in PDF)

Section A: Publication and authorship

  1. All submitted papers will be subjected to strict peer-review process by at least one national and one international reviewers that are experts in the area of th particular paper.
  2. The factors that are taken into account in review are relevance, soundness, significance, originality, readability and language.
  3. The possible decisions include acceptance, acceptance with revisions, or rejection.
  4. Even though the authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit a submission, there is no guarantee that the revised submission will be accepted.
  5. Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.
  6. The paper acceptance is constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.

Section B: Authors’ responsibilities

  1. Authors are responsible that their manuscripts are their original work.
  2.  Authors are responsible that the manuscript has not previously been published or currently being considered for publication elsewhere.
  3. Authors must participate in the peer review process and they are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.
  4. All authors mentioned in the paper must have significantly contributed to the research and must state that all data in the paper are real and authentic.
  5. Authors must notify the Editors of any conflicts of interest and must report any errors they discover in their published paper.

Section C: Reviewers’ responsibilities

  1. Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information.
  2. Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism of the authors.
  3. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments
  4. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors and also inform the Main Editor of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
  5. Reviewers should not review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest.

Section D: Editors’ responsibilities


  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 always consider the needs of the authors and the readers when attempting to improve the publication.
  4. Editors should publish corrections when needed.
  5. Editors should have a clear picture of a research’s funding sources.
  6. Editors should base their decisions solely one the papers’ importance, originality and relevance to publication’s scope and should not reverse their decisions without serious reason.
  7. Editors should preserve the anonymity of reviewers.
  8. Editors should ensure that all research material they publish conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.
  9. Editors shall act if they suspect misconduct, whether a paper is published or unpublished, and make all reasonable attempts in such situation.
  10. Editors should not allow any conflicts of interest between staff, authors, reviewers and board members.