Research Reports

... your source for reports

  • Măreşte caracterele
  • Dimensiune normală caractere
  • Micşorează caracterele

Instructions for authors

There are no translations available.

Abstract

The purpose of the abstract is to summarize the purpose, scope, methods, results, and conclusions reached. Use of nontechnical language is recommended for the abstract, since many people referencing abstracts are not technically familiar with the paper’s topic. The abstract is complete if it is able to stand alone and adequately describe the paper by providing just enough background information to make the results understandable. Normally an abstract should only be 100–250 words long. The abstract in English are required. Each of them must have no more then 250 words.

Keywords

The purpose of keywords is to provide a very rapid classification for the author’s paper. Keywords should be synonyms and closely related words relative to the paper’s topic and classification. The keywords (5-6 keywords) should follow the abstract without a blank line, accompanied by the heading "Keywords:" in Times Roman 12-point boldface, initially capitalized. Leave two blank lines after the keywords, and then begin the main text.

Author's biographical information

Texts must be accompanied by: the author's biographical information (professional title, didactic position, institutional affiliation, contact information, and email address), a list of the author's main publications (1/2 page), a digital photo in .jpeg or .jpg format (optional). All of these will be public information for selected authors.

The submission of a manuscript implies that the author certifies that the material is not copyrighted and is not currently under review for any refereed journal or conference proceedings. If the paper (or any version or part thereof) has appeared, or will appear, in another publication of any kind, the details of such publication must be disclosed to the editors at the time of submission.

Reference citations within the text

Use authors' last names, with the year of publication, e.g., “(Cojocaru, 2008; Cousins and Whitmore, 1998; Cooperrider, Whitney and Stavros, 2005)”. On first citation of references with three to five authors, give all names in full, thereafter use [first author] “et al.”. In the references, the first six authors should be listed in full.

If more than one article by the same author(s) in the same year is cited, the letters a, b, c, etc., should follow the year. If a paper is in preparation, submitted, or under review, the reference should include the authors, the title, and the year of the draft.

Reference list

A full list of references quoted in the text should be given at the end of the paper in alphabetical order of authors' surnames (or chronologically for a group of references by the same authors), commencing as a new page, typed double spaced. Titles of journals and books should be given in full, e.g.:

Books

Cooperrider, D., Whitney, D., and Stavros, J., 2005, Appreciative Inquiry Handbook. The first in a series of AI workbooks for leaders of change, Crown Custom Publishing and Berret-Koethler Publishers, San Francisco,   USA.

Chapter in edited book

Bell, J., 2004, „Managing evaluation projects”, în Wholey, J., Hatry, H, Newcomer, K. (coord.), Handbook of practical program evaluation, second edition, Jossey- Bass, San Francisco, pp. 571-603.

Journal article

Patton, M.Q., 1988, “Integrating evaluation into a program for increased utility and cost-effectiveness”, New directions for evaluation, vol. 39, pp. 85-94.

Illustrations

Illustrations should be digital files, following these guidelines:
300 dpi or higher
EPS, TIFF, or PSD format only
Submitted embedded in text files

Tables and Figures

Tables and figures (illustrations) should be embedded in the text A short descriptive title should appear above each table with a clear legend and any footnotes suitably identified below.

Manuscripts

Manuscripts should be no more than 5.000 words all-inclusive and should be double spaced, written in English. Well-developed shorter manuscripts are also acceptable. Submitted papers will be screened by the volume editors before they are entered into the review process. Submissions should be sent by email as an attachment of a single file that includes all images and figures. The preferred format is MS Word for Windows. All manuscripts should be generally outlined and edited to conform to the APA writing style. All submissions will be double-blind reviewed by at least two reviewers. Authors are expected to participate in the review process. The submission of a manuscript implies that the author certifies that the material is not copyrighted and is not currently under review for any refereed journal or conference proceedings. If the paper (or any version or part thereof) has appeared, or will appear, in another publication of any kind, the details of such publication must be disclosed to the editors at the time of submission. There are no fees for publication and authors will received the electronic version of his article by email.

Copyright transfer

In order to ensure both the widest dissemination and protection of material published in our SRR (administrated by Expert Projects Publishing), we ask authors to assign to SRR (“us” or “we”) the rights of copyright in the articles they contribute.

Please download the form bellow, sign it and sent it back top us scanned and by regular mail.

Click to download the Copyright transfer document to be signed

 

Publication Ethics

 

Publication Ethics Statement

We adhere to its Code of Conduct and to its Best Practice Guidelines of COPE. The editors of this journal enforce a rigorous peer-review process together with strict ethical policies and standards to ensure to add high quality scientific works to the field of scholarly publication. Unfortunately, cases of plagiarism, data falsification, image manipulation, inappropriate authorship credit, and the like, do arise. The editors of Social Research Reports take such publishing ethics issues very seriously and are trained to proceed in such cases with a zero tolerance policy.

Authors wishing to publish their papers in Revista de Cercetare si Interventie Sociala must abide to the following:

- Any facts that might be perceived as a possible conflict of interest of the author(s) must be disclosed in the paper prior to submission.

- Authors should accurately present their research findings and include an objective discussion of the significance of their findings.

- Data and methods used in the research need to be presented in sufficient detail in the paper, so that other researchers can replicate the work.

- Raw data should preferably be publicly deposited by the authors before submission of their manuscript. Authors need to at least have the raw data readily available for presentation to the referees and the editors of the journal, if requested. Authors need to ensure appropriate measures are taken so that raw data is retained in full for a reasonable time after publication.

- Simultaneous submission of manuscripts to more than one journal is not tolerated.

- Republishing content that is not novel is not tolerated (for example, an English translation of a paper that is already published in another language will not be accepted).

- If errors and inaccuracies are found by the authors after publication of their paper, they need to be promptly communicated to the editors of this journal so that appropriate actions can be taken.

- Your manuscript should not contain any information that has already been published. If you include already published figures or images, please obtain the necessary permission from the copyright holder to publish under the CC-BY license.

- Plagiarism, data fabrication and image manipulation are not tolerated.

 

Plagiarism is not acceptable in Revista de Cercetare si Interventie Sociala submissions.

Plagiarism includes copying text, ideas, images, or data from another source, even from your own publications, without giving any credit to the original source.

Reuse of text that is copied from another source must be between quotes and the original source must be cited. If a study's design or the manuscript's structure or language has been inspired by previous works, these works must be explicitly cited.

If plagiarism is detected during the peer review process, the manuscript may be rejected. If plagiarism is detected after publication, we may publish a correction or retract the paper.

 

Image files must not be manipulated or adjusted in any way that could lead to misinterpretation of the information provided by the original image.

Irregular manipulation includes: 1) introduction, enhancement, moving, or removing features from the original image; 2) grouping of images that should obviously be presented separately (e.g., from different parts of the same gel, or from different gels); or 3) modifying the contrast, brightness or color balance to obscure, eliminate or enhance some information.

If irregular image manipulation is identified and confirmed during the peer review process, we may reject the manuscript. If irregular image manipulation is identified and confirmed after publication, we may correct or retract the paper.

Our in-house editors will investigate any allegations of publication misconduct and may contact the authors' institutions or funders if necessary. If evidence of misconduct is found, appropriate action will be taken to correct or retract the publication. Authors are expected to comply with the best ethical publication practices when publishing with EXPERT PROJECTS.

 

Reviewer Suggestions

During the submission process, please suggest three potential reviewers with the appropriate expertise to review the manuscript. The editors will not necessarily approach these referees. Please provide detailed contact information (address, homepage, phone, e-mail address). The proposed referees should neither be current collaborators of the co-authors nor have published with any of the co-authors of the manuscript within the last five years. Proposed reviewers should be from different institutions to the authors. You may identify appropriate Editorial Board members of the journal as potential reviewers. You may suggest reviewers from among the authors that you frequently cite in your paper.

 

English Corrections

To facilitate proper peer-reviewing of your manuscript, it is essential that it is submitted in grammatically correct English. If you are not a native English speaker, we recommend that you have your manuscript professionally edited before submission or read by a native English-speaking colleague. This can be carried out by EXPERT PROJECTS . Professional editing will enable reviewers and future readers to more easily read and assess the content of submitted manuscripts.

 

Reviewers Recommendation

Authors can recommend potential reviewers. Journal editors will check to make sure there are no conflict of interests before contacting those reviewers, and will not consider those with competing interests. Reviewers are asked to declare any conflicts of interest. Authors can also enter the names of potential peer reviewers they wish to exclude from consideration in the peer review of their manuscript, during the initial submission progress. The editorial team will respect these requests so long as this does not interfere with the objective and thorough assessment of the submission.

 

Editors and Journal Staff as Authors

Editorial independence is extremely important and EXPERT PROJECTS does not interfere with editorial decisions. Editorial staff or editors shall not be involved in the processing their own academic work. Submissions authored by editorial staff/editors will be assigned to at least two independent outside reviewers. Decisions will be made by other editorial board members who do not have conflict of interests with the author. Journal staff are not involved in the processing of their own work submitted to any EXPERT PROJECTS journals.

 

Conflict of Interests

Authors must identify and declare any personal circumstances or interest that may be perceived as inappropriately influencing the representation or interpretation of reported research results. If there is no conflict of interest, please state "The authors declare no conflict of interest." Any role of the funding sponsors in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results must be declared in this section.

 

Editorial Procedures and Peer-Review

Initial Checks

All submitted manuscripts received by the Editorial Office will be checked by a professional in-house Managing Editor to determine whether they are properly prepared and whether they follow the ethical policies of the journal, including those for human and animal experimentation. Manuscripts that do not fit the journal's ethics policy or do not meet the standards of the journal will be rejected before peer-review. Manuscripts that are not properly prepared will be returned to the authors for revision and resubmission. After these checks, the Managing Editor will consult the journals’ Editor-in-Chief or Associate Editors to determine whether the manuscript fits the scope of the journal and whether it is scientifically sound. No judgment on the potential impact of the work will be made at this stage. Reject decisions at this stage will be verified by the Editor-in-Chief.

Peer-Review

Once a manuscript passes the initial checks, it will be assigned to at least two independent experts for peer-review. A single-blind review is applied, where authors' identities are known to reviewers. Peer review comments are confidential and will only be disclosed with the express agreement of the reviewer. In the case of regular submissions, in-house assistant editors will invite experts, including recommendations by an academic editor. These experts may also include Editorial Board members and Guest Editors of the journal. Potential reviewers suggested by the authors may also be considered. Reviewers should not have published with any of the co-authors during the past five years and should not currently work or collaborate with any of the institutions of the co-authors of the submitted manuscript.

Optional Open Peer-Review

The journal operates optional open peer-review: Authors are given the option for all review reports and editorial decisions to be published alongside their manuscript. In addition, reviewers can sign their review, i.e., identify themselves in the published review reports. Authors can alter their choice for open review at any time before publication, however once the paper has been published changes will only be made at the discretion of the Publisher and Editor-in-Chief. We encourage authors to take advantage of this opportunity as proof of the rigorous process employed in publishing their research. To guarantee an impartial refereeing the names of referees will be revealed only if the referees agree to do so, and after a paper has been accepted for publication.

Editorial Decision and Revision

All the articles, reviews and communications published in EXPERT PROJECTS journals go through the peer-review process and receive at least two reviews. The in-house editor will communicate the decision of the academic editor, which will be one of the following:

Accept after Minor Revisions: The paper is in principle accepted after revision based on the reviewer’s comments. Authors are given seven days for minor revisions.

Reconsider after Major Revisions: The acceptance of the manuscript would depend on the revisions. The author needs to provide a point by point response or provide a rebuttal if some of the reviewer’s comments cannot be revised. Usually, only one round of major revisions is allowed. Authors will be asked to resubmit the revised paper within a suitable time frame, and the revised version will be returned to the reviewer for further comments.

Reject and Encourage Resubmission: If additional collecting data are needed to support the conclusions, the manuscript will be rejected and the authors will be encouraged to re-submit the paper once further data collection have been conducted.

Reject: The article has serious flaws, and/or makes no original significant contribution. No offer of resubmission to the journal is provided.

All reviewer comments should be responded to in a point-by-point fashion. Where the authors disagree with a reviewer, they must provide a clear response.

 

Author Appeals

Authors may appeal a rejection by sending an e-mail to the Editorial Office of the journal. The appeal must provide a detailed justification, including point-by-point responses to the reviewers' and/or Editor's comments. The Managing Editor of the journal will forward the manuscript and related information (including the identities of the referees) to the Editor-in-Chief, Associate Editor, or Editorial Board member. The academic Editor being consulted will be asked to give an advisory recommendation on the manuscript and may recommend acceptance, further peer-review, or uphold the original rejection decision. A reject decision at this stage is final and cannot be reversed.

In the case of a special issue, the Managing Editor of the journal will forward the manuscript and related information (including the identities of the referees) to the Editor-in-Chief who will be asked to give an advisory recommendation on the manuscript and may recommend acceptance, further peer-review, or uphold the original rejection decision. A reject decision at this stage will be final and cannot be reversed.

 

Production and Publication

Once accepted, the manuscript will undergo professional copy-editing, English editing, proofreading by the authors, final corrections, pagination, and, publication.

 

Submission EMAIL:  Această adresă de e-mail este protejată de spamboţi; aveţi nevoie de activarea JavaScript-ului pentru a o vizualiza

 

Cautare

Limba

RomânăEnglezaFranceză

Statistici

Membri : 3
Conţinut : 145
Număr afişări conţinut : 914217

Acum pe site

Avem 40 vizitatori online