EN

ABOUT US – OUR MISSION

The Central European Academy carries out publishing activities under the name of Central European Academic Publishing, which is responsible for publishing and distributing international comparative law research related to the research and educational mission of the Central European Academy.

It publishes double-blind peer-reviewed, OPEN ACCESS publications in English complying with the highest international professional and academic standards and the requirements of scientific metrics and indexing.

Central European Academic Publishing carries out its publishing activities in accordance with the Central European Academy's Organisational and Operational Rules (to be downloaded) and the Publishing Regulations (to be downloaded).

OUR MISSION

In accordance with the activities of the Academy, CEA PUBLISHING strives to publish academic works of a high professional-scientific level, primarily to strengthen the legal culture of Central Europe, with multidisciplinary themes/topics in the field of social sciences, especially highlighting the international comparative law aspect.

OUR STAFF

Publisher (in charge): Prof. Dr. Tímea Barzó, Director-General, Central European Academy.
The General Editorial Board makes decisions relating to the main strategic questions concerning the publishing activities of the CEA. It consists of the Director-General and the Editors-in-chief of all Book Series or Journal Editorial Boards.

In subordination of the General Editorial Board, each journal and book series owned by CEA are guided by specific editorial boards.

CONTACT WITH CEA PUBLISHING

  • Central European Academic Publishing
  • 1122 Budapest, Városmajor St. 12-14.
  • Mail Address: 1539 Budapest, PO box 561.
  • Email:

OUR PUBLISHING ACTIVITIES

Several book series and journals are published by the Publisher; however, stand-alone volumes and monographs can also be published. Our Book Series runs at least one Volume/Book per year, our Journals have two issues per year. The book series cooperates with the Faculty of Law of the University of Miskolc and the Ferenc Mádl Institute of Comparative Law. The following book series and journals (with published volumes and issues) are already active:

  • Studies of the Central European Professors’ Network

  • Legal Studies on Central Europe

  • Legal Heritage

  • Central European Journal of Comparative Law (CEJCL)

  • Law, Identity and Values (LIVe)

  • Central European Academy Law Review (CEA LR)

Upcoming series:

  • Human Rights and Rule of Law Series

  • Young Researchers Monograph Series

  • Quintessence Series

  • Studies of the Ferenc Mádl Institute

For all publications, peer review is carried out by internationally recognised experts in the field, mostly from abroad, and linguistic proofreading is carried out by an international company specialising in scientific publications.

In addition to the traditional publishing of printed books and journals, it publishes scientific works on its website; in the case of journals, on the various OJS platforms and places them in the MTA REAL repository. Furthermore, the present activities support the international recognition of domestic and foreign, especially Central European, law journals and books, while enhancing the international academic reputation of the University of Miskolc.

GENERAL GUIDE FOR AUTHORS

We kindly ask the authors to consider the publication type-specific requirements, as well, which are fixed by contracts or by the editorial board at one of the book series or journals published by the Central European Academy.

THE GENERAL RULES ARE THE FOLLOWING

1. The General Editorial Board invites the authors to send their manuscripts or Book-proposal for the purpose of publication to the following e-mail address: . The General Editorial Board also invites the authors to submit the following pieces of information in a separate document:

  • full title of the study in English;

  • full title of the study, abstract and key words in English;

  • type of the study (not obligatory);

  • name(s) of the author(s), her/his/their academic degree(s)/title(s);

  • institutional affiliation (as the author wants to make it appear in the journal);

  • ORCID number, e-mail address of the author.

The Editorial Board decides whether to begin the publication process or not considering the submitted manuscript.

Being a public benefit organisation, the Central European Academy carries out its academic publishing activities for the benefit of the public and the academic society, based on state financial support. It undertakes the publication costs and does not charge the author any cost (publishing or processing fees).

2. All kinds of scientific manuscripts are subjected to a double-blind, peer review process. With anonymity as the most important principle, this process consists of three stages:

  • General editorial review.

  • Double-blind peer review with the contribution of experts.

  • Final decision on publishing by the editor.

During the process of reviewing, the editor communicates with the author(s) via e-mail. The author is informed about the result of the process of peer-reviewing by the editor who conducted the general editorial review. Correspondence related to peer review and peer reviewers’ reviews is archived by the Editor-in-chief. Peer reviews are not published.

See our guidance about the peer review process: Information About Peer Review Processes

The Editorial Board invites the authors to make a declaration that they have not recommended their studies for publication to other publishers and their studies have not been published yet when submitting it to CEA Publishing. CEA Publishing does not publish any manuscript that does not meet this requirement.

 

The Editor-in-chief of a Book Series or a Journal or the General Editorial Board gives information to the authors about the opinions of peer-reviewers (in an anonymized way). The editor-in-chief of the journal or the book series (in consultation with the editor(s) of the volume) decides whether a manuscript can be published in the journal or volume. The Editor-in-chief and the Publisher (in charge) hold the right to veto the editor’s decision.

The Editor-in-chief informs the authors of the acceptance or the refusal of the studies. After the acceptance of the study, the Editor-in-chief contacts the authors for the purpose of transferring the copyright to CEA Publishing. The Hungarian Law is applicable to licensing agreements and contracts.

The overall peer-review process generally takes 2-3 months. In the event of delays, authors should be informed of the reason for the delay and given the opportunity to withdraw their manuscript if they wish.

The Authors shall comply with the Publication Ethics. Following the COPE (https://publicationethics.org/guidance) guidances and best practices, the General Editorial Board carries out processes for handling both pre-publication and post-publication critiques. In any case of right infringement, plagiarism or defamation, etc., depending on the possible means to resolve the problem, General Editorial Board refuses the manuscript or calls the Author to modify it, interrupts the publishing process or retracts the published manuscript.

Decisions may be guided by the editorial board of the journal or book series and by guidelines set by the General Editorial Board, and are limited by existing laws on defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor is permitted to run computer software to filter out plagiarism.

If necessary, the linguistic proofreader may correct some paragraphs of the manuscript or make recommendations for the revision of the text. Hence, the linguistic proofreader does not correct large portions of the text. If the linguistic proofreader does not pass the manuscript for publication for the third time, this results in its final rejection.

Declaration of exclusivityThe editorial team invites the authors, when they submit their manuscripts, to make a declaration that they have not recommended their manuscripts for publication to other publishers and which have not been published previously. The Journal does not publish any manuscript that does not meet this requirement.

FORMAL REQUIREMENTS

    1. Manuscript text must be in Times New Roman, font size 12, single-spaced, and justified. This applies to abstract and keywords as well. Footnotes must adhere to the same, except in case of the font size, which must be 10.

    2. Quotes longer than 40 words must be highlighted by using margins or smaller font size. Please use single quotation marks for citations, and double quotation marks for specific words, and phrases.

    3. Please do not use bold font type in the text body or in footnotes, please use italic style only for judicial cases or for specific expressions.

    4. Please use short titles, subtitles, and headings.

    5. Please use footnotes, not endnotes. These must be ordered using Arabic numerals. If necessary, please mark the origin of the text next to the title with an asterisk. Please also indicate the acknowledgements for persons and scholarships next to the title. Please mark this note at the bottom of the first page.

    6. A reference list (bibliography) is required at the end, on a separate page.

    7. Please use Arabic numerals because of the unification of chapters and subheadings (1., 1.1., 1.1.1). 

    8. Regarding citations, footnotes, and the reference list, please use the (adapted) Harvard Referencing Style Guide.

    9. Please use the DOI-numbers of the cited works (in a https format) in the reference list after the requested forms of citations detailed in the Harvard Referencing Style Guide. For that, it is recommended to use this free access service: https://apps.crossref.org/SimpleTextQuery

    10. Please do not use colourful tables, charts, and pictures in your manuscript.

    11. Given that each country names and numbers its legal sources (laws, judgments and orders) differently, authors may indicate these sources in their manuscript at their own discretion, with the additional requirements of clarity and consistency.

    12. In the case of cited work titles with Cyrillic letters, please add their phonetic transcription in the Latin alphabet, as well.

ABOUT HARVARD REFERENCE STYLE GUIDE

Authors shall use footnote references (I.) and a reference list (II.). (Note: Examples below are written boldly for the sake of clarity, but the references of the manuscript shall not be written with bold letters.)

I. Footnote references must be included following the use of a quote or paraphrase taken from another piece of work. Footnote references are abbreviated forms of the sources in the reference list. In footnote references authors shall use the abbreviated form even for the first time of citing a source. Footnote references refer to a quote or paraphrase. They are much shorter than full references. The full reference of footnote citations appears in the reference list. Footnote citations contain the author(s)’s or editor(s)’s surname, year of publication and page number(s). Note: p. refers to a single page, pp. refers to a range of pages.

EXAMPLES:

  • In case of citing a source with one author, this takes the form: Mitchell, 2017, p. 189.

  • In case of citing a source with two or three authors, state all surnames like so: Field and Solie, 2007, p. 254.

  • In case of citing a source with four or more authors, the first author’s surname should be stated followed by ‘et al’: Donatelli et al., 2010, p. 65.

  • If referencing multiple works from one author released in the same year, the works are allocated a letter (a, b, c etc) after the year. This allocation is done in the reference list so is done alphabetically according to the author's surname and source title: Mitchell, 2017b, p. 189.

  • In case of citing different editions of the same work, include the author(s)’s name only once followed by all the appropriate dates separated by semicolons: Mitchell, 2010; 2017.

  • In case of citing a reference with no date, simply state ‘no date’ in place of the year: Mitchell, no date, p. 189.

  • In case of citing a secondary source, state the reference you used first followed by ‘cited in’ and the original author: Smith, 2000, cited in Mitchell, 2017, p. 189.

II. A reference list is a complete list of all the sources used when creating a piece of work. This list includes information about the sources like the author, date of publication, title of the source and more. A Harvard reference list shall…

  • be on a separate page at the end of the document;

  • be organised alphabetically by author, unless there is no author then it is ordered by the source title, excluding articles such as a, an or the;

    • [Note: If there are multiple works by the same author these are ordered by date, if the works are in the same year they are ordered alphabetically by the title and are allocated a letter (a,b,c etc) after the date.]

  • be double spaced: there should be a full, blank line of space between each line of text;

  • contain full references for all footnote references used.

The different sources shall be cited in the following ways (examples):

  • In case of citing a book, the format is as follows: Author surname(s), initial(s). (Year published) Title (italicised). Edition. Place of publication: publisher. For example: Brown, S. (2007) The Regulation of Consumer Credit: A Transatlantic Analysis. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing; https://doi.org/10.4337/9781784712495.

  • In case of citing an edited book, the format is as follows: Editor surname(s), initial(s). (ed(s).) (Year). Title of book. Edition. Place of publication: publishers. For example: Alabrese, M., Brunori, M., Rolandi, S., Saba, A. (eds.) (2017) Agricultural Law. 1st edn. New York City: Springer International Publishing; https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64756-2.

  • In case of citing a chapter in an edited book, the format is as follows: Author surname(s), initial(s) (Year) ‘Title of chapter’ in editor(s) surname, initial(s) (ed(s).) Title of book. Edition. Place of publication: publisher, page numbers. For example: Alabrese, M. (2017) ‘Agricultural Law from a Global Perspective: An Introduction’ in Alabrese, M., Brunori, M., Rolandi, S., Saba, A. (eds.) Agricultural Law. 1st edn. New York City: Springer International Publishing, pp. 1–12; https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64756-2_1.

  • In case of citing a journal article, the format is as follows: Author name(s), initial(s) (Year published) ‘Title of article’, Title, Volume(Issue/Season/Number etc.), page numbers. For example: Jacobs, S.B. (2019) ‘The Statutory Separation of Powers’, The Yale Law Journal, 129(2), pp. 378–444. [Note: If the journal does not use numeration for volumes, please use the following format after the title of the journal: Year/Issue, page numbers. For example: 2019/2, pp. 107–121.]

  • In case of citing an online journal or newspaper article, the format is as follows: Author surname(s), initial(s). (Year) ‘Title of article’, Title of journal, Volume(Issue/Season) [online]. Available at: URL or DOI (Accessed: day month year). For example: Szilágyi, J.E. (2019) ‘Systematization and some current issues of water law and water regulation in the framework of the European Union’, Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Law, 14(26), pp. 255–275 [Online]. Available at:  https://doi.org/10.21029/JAEL.2019.26.255 (Accessed: 11 March 2022).

  • In case of citing a website, the format is as follows: Author surname(s), initial(s). (Year of publishing) Title of page/site [Online]. Available at: URL (Accessed: day month year). For example: Mitchell, J.A. (2017) How and when to reference [Online]. Available at: https://www.howandwhentoreference.com/ (Accessed: 27 May 2017).

List of abbreviations:

Please use the following abbreviations in your manuscripts:

  • art. – article

  • et al. – and others

  • etc. – and so on

  • vol. / vols. – volume / volumes

  • c. – approximately

  • ms. – manuscript

  • edn. – edition

  • ed. / eds. – editor / editors

  • p. / pp. – page / pages

  • para. / paras. – paragraph / paragraphs

  • e.g. – for example

  • pt. / pts. – part / parts

  • cf. – compare

  • ibid. – at the same place

  • ip. – in press

PEER-REVIEW PROCESS

The Publisher strictly adheres to the rules of the double-anonymised peer review model. Before the finish of the publication process, neither the author nor the reviewers know the identity of each other. In general, the peer review process with two external experts is used. Books are to be under peer-reviewing process with at least three reviewers, except for Quintessence Book Series. In the case of Journals, the peer review process is also regulated by the specific rules displayed on the relevant Journal webpage.

This process consists of three stages:

  • General editorial review.

  • Double-blind peer review with the contribution of experts.

  • Final decision on publishing made by the editors.

During general editorial review the Editor of a Book or the Editor-in-Chief of a Journal (hereinafter: Editor) examines the submitted manuscript based on general requirements, namely academic suitability, morality, and uniqueness.

The editor shall answer the following questions about the general editorial review:

  • Does the manuscript ensure anonymity? Yes/No

  • Does the study meet the detailed formal requirements of the Journal? Yes/No

  • Did the author attach the declaration that he/she has not recommended his/her study for publication in other journals and that his/her study has not been published yet? Yes/No

  • Did the PhD student attach the reference to his/her scientific supervisor? Yes/No

  • Does the manuscript comply with the above-mentioned general requirements of academic suitability, morality, and uniqueness? Yes/No

If the Editor so decides, the manuscript is sent to the peer reviewers. Neither the peer reviewers nor the authors shall be acquainted with each other to ensure personal and institutional independence. The Editor mediates all interactions between the author(s) and peer reviewers.

In the case of journal articles, the Editor shall decide to send the generally reviewed manuscript in an anonymized form to two academically qualified experts from the relevant branch/field of law (social science), who then provide their professional opinions about the manuscript.

During the process of reviewing, the Editor communicates with the author(s) via e-mail. The author is informed about the result of the process of peer-reviewing by the editor who conducted the general editorial review. Correspondence related to peer-review and peer reviewers’ reviews are archived by the Editor. Peer reviews are not published.

The peer reviewers (experts) shall answer the following questions within the framework of the double-blind review process:

  • Is the study of high quality? Yes/No

  • Are the relevant national and international sources of law and case law adequately processed in relation to the subject of the study? Yes/No (peer reviewers may suggest further sources of law and case law to the author)

  • Is the relevant national and international scientific literature adequately processed in relation to the subject of the study? Yes/No (peer reviewers may suggest further scientific literature to the author)

  • Does the study evaluate the analysed sources of law and case law, and does it contain de lege ferenda proposals? (Does the study contain their own scientific results?) Yes/No

  • Is the study’s reference system relevant and correct? Yes/No

  • Does the peer reviewer recommend the study for publication in the Journal? Yes/No/With changes (for example, with the above-mentioned additions related to sources of law, case law or scientific literature)

  • If the reviewer recommended changes, does the reviewer request the Publisher to send him/her back the modified version of the study? Yes/No (In the case of YES, the reviewer retains the right to request not to be listed among the reviewers in the published work.)

Decisions on publishing

After receiving the professional opinions of peer reviewers, the Editor decides whether a manuscript can be published in the journal or Book volume. The Editor exercises discretionary competence regarding this only in the case of one supporting and one rejecting opinion. Two supporting opinions result in the manuscript being published. However, the Editor shall decide in which issue of the Journal the manuscript will be published. Two rejecting opinions imply rejection. Decisions shall be also guided by the editorial board of the journal or book series and shall be consistent with guidelines set by the general editorial board, and are limited by existing laws on defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor is permitted to run a computer software to filter out plagiarism.

The Editor-in-Chief (of a given Journal or of a Book Series) and the Publisher (Director General of the Central European Academy in charge) hold the right to veto the editor’s decision.

In case one or both the opinions recommend(s) the manuscript for publication with changes, the editor sets a fair time limit for making the necessary changes. If the author addresses these required changes, the modified manuscript can be sent to the same peer reviewers again for their professional opinions.

In case of the editor's supporting decision on publishing, the editor may decide to send the manuscript to a linguistic proofreader, if the author’s native language is not English. The costs of linguistic proofreading are covered by the Publisher.

Obligations of peer reviewers

Contribution to editorial decisions: Peer reviewers help the editorial team in decision-making if required, anonymously supporting the author in raising the scientific level of the scholarly work during the process of collegial revision (double-blind review).

Efficiency: In case the selected peer reviewer thinks that:

  • she/he cannot provide scientifically and professionally well-founded opinions because she/he does not feel qualified, or

  • she/he cannot evaluate the research presented in the manuscript for other reasons, or

  • she/he is aware of the inability to prepare her/his opinions effectively and within the given time,

  • she/he is obliged to notify the editor and waive participation in the peer-review.

Confidentiality: All received manuscripts are considered confidential. Peer reviewers shall refrain from using information obtained during the peer-review process to their own or another’s advantage or to the disadvantage or discredit of others. They shall not involve anyone else in the review without first obtaining permission from the Journal.

Objectivity: The evaluation shall be carried out objectively. Personally criticising the author is considered inappropriate. The peer reviewers’ views must be conveyed in a straightforward and argumentative manner.

Reference to sources: Peer reviewers shall know the relevant published works not cited by the author(s). Any statement that contains an observation, thought or argument from a work published earlier must be accompanied by an appropriate reference. Furthermore, the peer reviewer should draw the editor’s attention to any substantive similarity or overlap between the examined manuscript and other material previously published and known by him/her. Peer reviewers should refrain from suggesting that authors include citations to their work merely to increase citation counts or enhance the visibility of their work; suggestions must be based on valid academic or technological reasons.

Disclosure and conflict of interest: The privileged information or ideas obtained during the evaluation shall be handled confidentially and not be used for personal promotion.

Suspected misconduct: In case the peer reviewer has concerns regarding misconduct either during the research or writing and submitting of the manuscript, or the peer reviewer notices substantial similarities between the manuscript and a concurrent submission to another journal or published article, she/he shall directly get in touch with the editor. The peer reviewer shall not attempt to investigate on her/his own.

PUBLICATION ETHICS AND COPE COMPLIANCE

STATEMENT OF COPE COMPLIANCE

Central European Academic Publishing functions on the principles of morality and cooperation, serving the development of academic research on law and it fully adheres to the core practises of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). CEA Publishing makes a great effort to comply with the standards adopted by COPE (see: http://publicationethics.org/about) in publishing all types of scientific works, academic journals or books, and also expects the authors and editors to follow these main principles of publication ethics.

In any case of research misconduct or violation of publication ethics, CEA Publishing will investigate the problem and consult the relevant flowchart (good practice) elaborated by the COPE (see https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Flowcharts). We encourage all authors and readers to inform us about any research misconduct, or breach of publication ethics, even if they are not amount to a right infringement. Contact us at the following email address:

Each contributing party to the publishing process – author(s), translator(s), editor(s), peer reviewers, and the publisher – shall accept the standards relevant to the expected moral behaviour.

PRINCIPLES OF PUBLICATION ETHICS

Exclusivity

The CEA Publishing exclusively publishes manuscripts that

  • are written in English,

  • have not been submitted to other journals for publication, and

  • have not been published in other journals.

Prior publication in any language other than English is permitted.

Note: The author may upload her/his manuscript before or simultaneously while submitting to CEA Publishing as a preprint to a website that contains discussion papers to enhance the quality of research. This is not considered an obstacle to publishing the ultimate version of the research in the Journal/Book.

 

Equal opportunities

The editor always evaluates the intellectual content of manuscripts regardless of the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, nationality or political views. The editors’ decisions shall be based on professional and scientific aspects.

 

Confidentiality

The involved editorial team (journal or book series) and the General Editorial Board, as well as peer reviewers, treat submitted manuscripts as confidential information. They do not provide any information related to the manuscripts to unauthorised persons. Exceptions to this rule are the corresponding author, the peer reviewers, other editorial consultants, and the publisher.

 

Disclosure and conflict of interest

The editor is not allowed to use the unpublished material of the submitted manuscript for his own research without the author’s prior written consent.

 

Obligations of authors

Guidelines for disclosure: Authors presenting original research should provide an accurate report of the work performed. The drawing of interpretations and conclusions can only be based on facts or unbiased and logical evidence. The background data of the study should be accurately presented. The study should provide sufficient details and references so that the processes described can be replicated by others. False or intentionally inaccurate claims are considered as unethical and unacceptable behaviour.

Revoking: If authors wish to revoke or correct any part of the study, they must contact one of the editors, who will then initiate the general peer-reviewing process for the revised parts. The publisher and editors support correcting, clarifying, retracting or explaining the content of the study in all cases.

Fees and remuneration: The submission of the manuscript and any amendments or supplements thereto shall be free of charge. Any remuneration of the author is depend on the copyright agreement between the author and the publisher.

Originality and plagiarism: The authors shall guarantee that the study is their own original intellectual work, and if they used others’ works and/or expressions, they are appropriately and professionally cited. The publisher and editors will take the necessary steps if a manuscript is suspected of plagiarism. Under no circumstances must the publisher or editors associate themselves with plagiarist conduct, and they do not permit any form of plagiarism. If a statement for plagiarism is sent to the publisher or editors in connection with any of the studies, the editors scrutinise the circumstances and take the necessary steps. In case of suspected plagiarism, the editor enquires with the corresponding author and simultaneously gets in touch with the submitting author. If the latter does not respond within the time frame determined by the editor, he/she contacts the institution of the author with the request to investigate. Until all the questions are clarified, the Journal does not proceed with moving the manuscript forward.

Multiple, redundant or simultaneous publishing: It is not a good practice to have the manuscript of the same research published in various independent publications or journals. The submission of the same manuscript to different journals is deemed unethical and unacceptable.

Reference to sources: The cited works must be properly referred to in all cases. The authors shall refer to all publications that have influenced their work. (For detailed information, see General Guide for Authors.)

Contributors to the research: Any person who contributed substantially to the concept, design, implementation or interpretation of the presented study must be included as an author. Those who contributed significantly to the study must be indicated as co-authors. However, those who were involved in certain important stages of the study/research project should be indicated as contributors. Furthermore, the main author must ensure that:

  • all major co-authors are mentioned in the study,

  • she/he has not nominated persons as co-authors who are not entitled to it, and

  • all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the study and agreed to publish it.

Disclosure and conflict of interest: Each author is obliged to disclose any financial or other material conflicts of interest in the manuscript, which may influence its results or interpretation. All funding sources for the study/research project must be made public.

 

Self-plagiarism

In the case of self-plagiarism (text recycling) of a published article, editors may consider the following steps.

They may consider publishing a correction to the article when the following apply:

  • sections of the text are identical or nearly identical to a previous publication by the same author(s), but

  • there is still sufficient new material in the article to justify its publication.

Editors may consider a retraction of an article in the following cases:

  • There is significant overlap in the text, generally excluding methods, with sections that are identical or nearly identical to a previous publication by the same author(s).

  • The recycled text reports previously published data and there is insufficient new material in the article to justify its publication in light of the previous publication(s), i.e. redundant publication.

  • The overlap breaches copyright. In this case, legal advice may be needed.

 

Retraction

Editors will consider retracting a publication, if

  • they have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of major error (e.g. miscalculation or experimental error) or as a result of fabrication (e.g. of data) or falsification (e.g. image manipulation);

  • it constitutes plagiarism;

  • the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper attribution to previous sources or disclosure to the editor, permission to republish or justification (i.e. cases of redundant publication);

  • it contains material or data without authorisation for use;

  • it involves a copyright infringement or any other serious legal issue (e.g. libel, privacy);

  • it falls under unethical research;

  • it has been published solely on the basis of a compromised or manipulated peer-review process;

  • the author(s) failed to disclose a major competing interest (a.k.a. conflict of interest) that, in the view of the editor, would unduly affect interpretations of the work or recommendations by editors and peer reviewers.

If you have any questions or complaints about editorial decisions, or in the case of the alleged ethical or right infringements, please contact the Editor-in-Chief of the involved journal or book series or send an email to us: . The CEA Publishing will handle any complaints, legal or ethical disputes complying with the COPE principles and its best practices.

Kövessen minket ezeken a felületeken is:
Név: Közép-európai Akadémia

Rövid név: KEA

Adószám: 19359711-1-43

Közösségi adószám: HU19359711

Nyilvántartási száma: Oktatási Hivatal FNYF/419-4/2023

Székhely: 1122 Budapest, Városmajor utca 12-14.
CEA Copyright © 2022
linkedin facebook pinterest youtube rss twitter instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter instagram