About the Journal

Focus and Scope

Aims and Scope
The on-line peer-reviewed quarterly “Central European Political Studies Review” is a scholarly journal focused on modern politics in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE), including its Europe-wide or international ramifications. The journal thus provides a platform for primarily original political-scientific research related to the Central and East European region, as well as for other social-scientific research relevant for the discipline. Our background ambition, however, is to reflect upon problems and vectors that reach beyond the region itself.
Topically, the journal rests on three main pillars which mirror contemporary challenges to CEE: comparative research, testing social-scientific knowledge and experience across various countries; foreign and security studies, dealing with questions of societal order and peace in both established democracies and recently democratised or newly democratising countries, as well as their position the international context; and the broadly conceived field of political theory of both the empirical and normative kind, which puts empirical findings into wider conceptual or theoretical context.
Based on this triad of mutually interconnected topical areas, the Central European Political Studies Review aspires to facilitate scholarly debates on challenges with which the region as a whole or individual counties are faced, and which often carry important implications for scholarly understanding of political structures and processes beyond the CEE region itself. A prime example is provided by European integration and the questions it raises, and more broadly by the research agenda of European studies that allows for synthesising the particular CEE experience and its Europe-wide consequences. This is another reason why the Editors of the journal are also interested in articles from branches of political science other than those explicitly mentioned here, or from other social scientific disciplines (such as International Relations, Sociology, Media Studies, Political Economy, Area Studies, and others).

Theoretical and Methodological Specification
The Central European Political Studies Review thus aims to provide public yet scholarly arena for original research in the given discipline(s), research that will be firmly embedded in contemporary research trends on both European and international levels, yet will offer novel context and perspective. We therefore welcome theoretical and methodological pluralism which ultimately reflects the varying nature of research topics and problems. At the same time, we require authors to base their analyses within a robust theoretical framework supported by adequate research methodology, thus linking their findings to relevant scholarly frameworks and trends. In this way, we hope to mediate meaningful conversation not only between individual researchers or research teams themselves, but also between the academic community as such and the wider politically engaged public.

Types and Character of Published Articles
The structure of the journal includes original studies and scholarly essays, survey articles, review essays as well as standard book reviews; we also welcome critical discussion of previously published material. Upon consultation with the Editorial team, we welcome suggestions for special sections or issues.

With the possible exception of critical responses, we do not formally distinguish categories of texts that appear in the journal – which means that upon successful completion of the review process, all texts are published as ARTICLES. Book reviews are assessed by the Editorial Team and appear in a self-contained section.

The Central European Political Studies Review therefore invites both veteran researchers and authors just getting started with their serious publishing career; the sole criterion for acceptance of submitted work for publication is fulfilment of the formal and substantive requirements, as specified in this section.

We accept only original research papers in English, Czech and Slovak language. All submitted papers pass through a standard double-blind review procedure, which has been in operation since the very first issue of the journal (further information on the formal and content requirements for submissions, see the section EDITORIAL PLAN). Publication ethics requires that submitted texts have not been simultaneously offered for consideration with other journals, or will not be offered until the review process in the CEPSR is over. Also, papers that have been already published elsewhere, either in their entirety or the majority of its parts, are not acceptable for further consideration.

Starting from Issue 2–3 of Volume 15 (2013), published articles in languages other than English include a 1000–word English summary of the main questions, research methods, and findings.

Peer Review Process

The Central European Political Studies Review publishes scholarly articles and book reviews which correspond to the profile and aims of the journal. The CEPSR operates a two-tier double-blind peer review process:

(1) Submitted manuscripts first undergo an in-house review by the Editors who decide on acceptance or rejection for the full review procedure, on the grounds of conformity to the formal and substantive requirements of the journal.

(2) In case of acceptance, the article is then sent to two external referees, themselves either domestic or international experts in the given area of research.

Every effort is made to maintain both professional and personal independence between the author and the reviewers; however, we ask the authors to indicate the persons who have read the paper, and/or have cooperated in its completion before its submission. Also, the author may state in a separate letter the reasons why he/she wishes specific person should not be contacted for reviewing purposes; the Editors however reserve the right of final decision on the reviewers.

Please allow six to ten weeks for the completion of the review process. Based on the verdicts, we will either:
- publish the article as it is or after minor revisions (specified and subsequently reviewed by the Editors), or
- ask the author for a major revision and resubmission, after which another round of external reviewing will take place, or
- decline the text for further consideration

Although the opponents' reviews are of crucial importance, the final decision on acceptance of the article for publishing, or its rejection, is solely the right and responsibility of the Editorial team and the Editor-in-Chief. In case of contradictory or otherwise conflicting reviews, a third one will be solicited.

Publication Frequency

The journal appears three times a year (with one double issue). Due to the open deadline policy, decision on inclusion of articles in a particular issue is reserved by the Editorial team.

Open Access Policy

The Central European Poitical Studies Review is a no-fee open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution.

CEPSR Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

These guidelines are based on existing Elsevier policies and COPE’s Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and the Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers.

Duties of Editors

Editors (The Editor-In-Chief, Deputy Editor-In-Chief, and Managing Editors) evaluate submitted manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit (importance, originality, study’s validity, clarity) and its relevance to the journal’s scope, without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy or institutional affiliation. Decisions to edit and publish are not determined by the policies of governments or any other agencies outside of the journal itself. The Editor-in-Chief has ultimate responsibility for the entire editorial content of the journal and the timing of publication of that content.

Editors will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Editors and Editorial Board members will not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the authors’ explicit written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained by editors as a result of handling the manuscript will be kept confidential and not used for their personal advantage.

The invited Reviewers shall not be from the same institution as the Author(s), and their academic profile shall correspond to the empirical, theoretical and/or methodological focus of the reviewed manuscript.

The Editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication undergo peer-review by at least two reviewers who are expert in the field. The Editorial Team is collectively responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal will be published, based on the validation of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, the reviewers’ comments, and such legal requirements as are currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.

Editors of the CEPSR (in conjunction with the publisher and/or society) will take responsive measures when ethical concerns are raised with regard to a submitted manuscript or published paper. Every reported act of unethical publishing behaviour will be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.

Duties of Reviewers

Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with authors, may assist authors in improving their manuscripts. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of scientific endeavour. CEPSR shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to the scientific process have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.

Any manuscripts received for review are confidential documents and must be treated as such; they must not be shown to or discussed with others except if authorized by Editors (who would only do so under exceptional and specific circumstances). This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation

Reviews should be conducted objectively and observations formulated clearly with supporting arguments so that authors can use them for improving the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate.

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that is an observation, derivation or argument that has been reported in previous publications should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also notify the editors of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.

Any invited referee who has conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the manuscript and the work described therein is required to notify the editors and declare his/her conflicts of interest.

Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the authors. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for the reviewer’s personal advantage. This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation

Duties of Authors

Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed and the results, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the work. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Review articles should be accurate, objective and comprehensive, while editorial “opinion” or perspective pieces should be clearly identified as such. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

Authors may be asked to provide the raw data of their study together with the manuscript for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if practicable. In any event, authors should ensure accessibility of such data to other competent professionals for a reasonable time after publication (preferably via an institutional or subject-based data repository or other data centre), provided that the confidentiality of the participants can be protected and legal rights concerning proprietary data do not preclude their release.

Authors should ensure that they have written and submit only entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the work reported in the manuscript should also be cited. Plagiarism takes many forms, from "passing off" another's paper as the author's own, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

Publication ethics requires that submitted texts have not been simultaneously offered for consideration with other journals, or will not be offered until the review process in the CEPSR is over. Also, papers that have been already published elsewhere, either in their entirety or in their majority, are not acceptable for further consideration. Submission of a manuscript concurrently to more than one journal is unethical publishing behaviour and unacceptable.

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged in the introductory footnotes. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Authors should – at the earliest stage possible – disclose any conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include financial ones such as honoraria, educational grants or other funding, participation in speakers’ bureaus, membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest, and paid expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements, as well as non-financial ones such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs in the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the work should be disclosed (including the grant number or other reference number if any).

Authors should ensure that they have properly acknowledged the work of others, and should also cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately (from conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties) must not be used or reported without explicit permission from the source. Authors should not use information obtained in the course of providing confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, unless they have obtained an explicit permission of the author(s) of the work involved in these services.

When authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, it is their obligation to promptly notify the journal’s editors or publisher and cooperate with them to either correct the paper in the form of an erratum or to retract the paper. If the editors or publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error or inaccuracy, then it is the authors’ obligation to promptly correct or retract the paper or provide evidence to the journal editors of the correctness of the paper.

Journal History

The Central European Political Studies Review was founded in 1999 and appears three times a year, including a Summer double issue.

Středoevropské politické studie / Central European Political Studies Review