Ethics and malpractice statement

Lucian Blaga Yearbook is a refereed journal. All research articles in this journal undergo rigorous peer review, based on initial editor screening and anonymised refereeing by at least two anonymous referees.
See also COPE (

General duties and responsibilities of Editors

Editors should be responsible for everything published in their journals. Editors have to:

  •  meet the needs of readers and authors ( the authors agree to correct or to retract article, if the Editors offers arguments in this sens);

  • constantly improve the journal and approve correction;

  • ensure and increase the quality of the material they publish and for the research and the team of reviewers;

  • assure and offer freedom of expression;

  • maintain the integrity of the academic record;

  • preclude business needs from compromising intellectual standards;

  • we are always willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed.

    Relations with readers

    Readers should be informed about who has funded research and on the role of the funders in the research. The author have to inform about the funding for the research that issued the articles.

    Relations with authors

    Editors will ensure the quality of the material they publish, offering arguments for correction and all the informations that they need for publishing, using e-mail address

    Editors’ decisions to accept or reject a paper for publication is based only on the paper’s importance, originality, and clarity, and the study’s relevance to the remit of the journal.

    The authors could appeal against Editorial decisions, by writing the answers and arguments using e-mail adress and the e-mail adress used by the Editors during the calls.

    New Editors should not overturn decisions to publish submissions made by the previous Editor unless serious problems are identified.

    Relations with reviewers

    Editors should publish guidance to reviewers on everything that is expected of them. This guidance should be regularly updated and should refer or link to this code.

    Editors ensure that peer reviewers’ identities are protected, erasing all the informations about the reviewers, when send the evaluation document to author.

    The peer-review process

    Editors ensure that material submitted to their journal remains confidential while under review.


    Editors follow the procedure set out in this COPE flowchart.

    Editors should respond promptly to complaints and should ensure there is a way for dissatisfied complainants to take complaints further, using address.

    Encouraging debate

    Cogent criticisms of published work will be published unless Editors have convincing reasons why they cannot be. Authors of criticised material have the opportunity to respond.

All the Article will be passed through:
Similarity Check Plagiarism Screening System

The editorial board is participating in a growing community of Similarity Check System’s users in order to ensure that the content published is original and trustworthy. Similarity Check is a medium that allows for comprehensive manuscripts screening, aimed to eliminate plagiarism and provide a high standard and quality peer-review process.

Detailed description of the Similarity Check System can be found at:

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.