University of Bucharest Review. Literary and Cultural Studies Series (UBR) is the flagship journal of the English Department of the Faculty of Foreign Languages and Literatures, University of Bucharest and is proudly published by Bucharest University Press.
One of the priorities of the editorial team is to publish quality articles. We encourage the best standards of publication ethics and are committed to providing fair, unbiased, and transparent peer review processes and editorial decisions.
University of Bucharest Review adheres to the Core practices of the Committee On Publication Ethics (COPE) and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing of the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ).
Plagiarism
Manuscripts containing plagiarism will not be considered for publication in the journal. Plagiarism is defined as the use of another person’s work, words or ideas without attribution or permission, and representation of them as one’s own original work. Plagiarism may take many forms, ranging from major plagiarism (the copy-and-paste of large amounts of text), to minor plagiarism without dishonest intent (e.g. when an author uses parts of an introduction from an earlier paper) and even self-plagiarism (the re-use of significant, identical or near-identical portions of one’s own work without citing the original version).
UBR subscribes to plagiarism detection software and all contributions submitted to the journal will be scanned to verify originality. iThenticate (https://www.ithenticate.com/) is currently used.
If major plagiarism is brought to light after a manuscript has been published, the journal will proceed to conduct a preliminary investigation. The journal reserves the right to formally retract such manuscripts and publish statements to reference material as plagiarism.
Authors’ Responsibilities
Authors should ensure that:
- any real or apparent conflicting or competing interest is clearly stated on submission of their article (this would include funding assistance). Any financial aid (for example national or international research grants, scholarships) that supported the writing of the article must be acknowledged.
- their work is original and written by them.
- their work has not been previously published and has been submitted only to the journal.
- where material is taken from other sources (including their own published writing) the source is clearly cited and that where appropriate permission is obtained.
- their work does not infringe on any rights of others, including privacy rights and intellectual property rights.
- their data is true and not manipulated.
- their data is their own or that they have permission to use data reproduced in their article.
- they adhere to all research ethics guidelines of their discipline, particularly where human or animal subjects are involved.
- they contact the Editor to identify and correct any material errors upon discovery, whether prior or subsequent to publication of their work.
- authorship of the article is accurately represented, including ensuring that all individuals credited as authors participated in the actual authorship of the work and that all who participated are credited and have given consent for publication.
Competing interests
Authors must include a ‘Competing interests’ statement. A competing interest will not preclude publication, but it provides full transparency for readers. If there are no competing interests to declare, the following standard statement is added: ‘No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).’
Authors should disclose relevant financial and non-financial interests and relationships that might be considered likely to affect the interpretation of their findings or which editors, reviewers or readers might reasonably wish to know. This includes any relationship to the journal, for example if editors publish their own research in their own journal.
Examples of conflicts of interest might include the following, although it is not an exhaustive list:
- Having received fees for consulting.
- Having received research funding.
- Having been employed by a related company.
- Holding stocks or shares in a company which might be affected by the publication of the article.
- Having received funds reimbursing the author for attending a related conference, or talk.
If an undisclosed competing interest is brought to the attention of the editorial office after publication, UBR will follow the COPE guidelines.
Authorship and AI Tools
UBR adheres to the COPE Guidelines on Authorship and AI Tools which state that AI tools cannot meet the requirements for authorship as they cannot take responsibility for the submitted work. Authors are required to acknowledge the use of AI Tools in any aspect of the generation of their article. If the authors have used Generative AI tools (e.g. Chat GPT) or any large language models at any point in the preparation of their manuscript, they have to clearly disclose the use in the manuscript, including the full name of the tool used (with version number), how it was used, and the reason for use.
Data fabrication/falsification
Researchers should present their results clearly, honestly, and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation. Research images (e.g. figures, pictures) should not be modified in a misleading way. Researchers should strive to describe their methods and to present their findings clearly and unambiguously; should follow applicable reporting guidelines; should not omit inconvenient, inconsistent or inexplicable findings or results that do not support the authors’ or sponsors’ hypothesis or interpretation.
Authors should alert the editor promptly if they discover an error in any submitted, accepted or published work; should cooperate with editors in issuing corrections or retractions when required; should represent the work of others accurately in citations and quotations; should not copy references from other publications if they have not read the cited work.
Reviewers’ Responsibilities
Reviewers should:
- maintain the confidentiality of the review process.
- refrain from contacting the authors directly without permission of the journal.
- immediately alert their journal editor of any real or potential competing interest that could affect the impartiality of their reviewing and decline to review where appropriate.
- report any suspected ethical misconduct as part of a thorough and honest review of the work.
- conduct themselves fairly and impartially.
We are aware, of course, that academics will come from a particular school of thought and/or may have strong ties to a particular interest. All we ask is that reviewers strive to act fairly. If in doubt about whether a conflict exists, a reviewer should be transparent and seek the views of the journal editor.
Editors’ Responsibilities
Editors should:
- maintain and promote consistent ethical policies for their journals.
- oversee and act to enforce those policies as needed in a fair and consistent manner.
- carry out thorough, objective and confidential peer review, in adherence with COPE guidelines and UBR‘ ethics policy.
- exercise the highest standards of personal integrity in their work as editor of the journal, recognising and planning for instances where they could have a competing interest or the appearance of a competing interest.
- work with authors, reviewers, and Editorial Board members as necessary to ensure they are sufficiently advised regarding their journals’ ethics and publishing policies and that the journal’s stewardship on ethical matters is fair, unbiased, and timely.
- not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate. Editors may not use any of the findings included in an article under review, unless they have sought and obtained written consent from the author.
Publisher’s Responsibilities
Bucharest University Press Journals and the institutions on behalf of which it publishes shall ensure that:
- the reputation of published journals and published work is protected by only publishing content of the highest quality and relevance in a timely and responsible manner.
- collaborations with other publishers adhere to standards for best practices on ethical matters, errors and retractions.
- the publisher’s address and contact details are published in all journals and on these journals’ websites.
- guidelines on how the review process works are published on all journals’ websites.
- journals publish guidance on what is expected from reviewers.
- journals publish guidance on what is expected from authors.
- journals have properly functioning editorial boards and international advisory boards.
Policy with regard to Malpractice
University of Bucharest Review and Bucharest University Press take issues of copyright infringement, plagiarism or other breaches of best practice in publication very seriously. We seek to protect the rights of our authors and we always investigate claims of plagiarism or misuse of published articles. Equally, we seek to protect the reputation of the journal against malpractice.
Any proven breach of ethical conduct by authors (including, but not limited to, plagiarism, submission of previously published research, simultaneous submission of the same work to other journals, inclusion of third-party copyright material without permission or with insufficient acknowledgement, or where the authorship of the article is contested) will lead to the exclusion of the submission in question or to the removal of the article. Any collaboration between UBR and the author found in breach of academic ethical norms shall cease. Please see the COPE retraction guidelines for more information on this point (https://publicationethics.org/guidance/guideline/retraction-guidelines) and the NISO Guidelines (https://www.niso.org/standards-committees/crec).
Malpractice by editors or reviewers with respect to the articles handled will result in the immediate termination of the editor’s/reviewer’s collaboration with UBR.
UBR will promptly publish corrections, clarifications as well as retractions and apologies, in line with its commitment to academic and editorial integrity.
Appeals and Complaints
University of Bucharest Review follows Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines on appeals to journal editor decisions and complaints about a journal’s editorial management of the peer review process.
We welcome genuine appeals to editor decisions. However, strong evidence or new data/information in response to the editor’s and reviewers’ comments need to be provided.
Should you, as an author, wish to comment on aspects of the journal’s editorial management please contact us and mention “appeal/complaint” as the topic.
The Editorial Team