Editorial Policy

Contact with authors and acceptance of Papers

The Journal issues a Call for papers both by email (broadcasted to the interested public as well as targeted to established collaborators and scholars with an interest in the field of archaeology) and posting on the website of Institute of Archaeology and its social media pages. Authors are strongly advised to read the Instructions for Authors before submitting a manuscript.

Submission Process

All submissions are considered by the Editor-in-Chief in the first instance. The submissions are then read by the editorial board and assessed as per general academic quality, appropriateness to the field and compliance to the editorial rules and authors’ guidelines. The acceptance or rejection are discussed in several Board meetings. The accepted papers are forwarded to peer-reviewers and their authors are notified of this first-tier acceptance. The rejected papers are returned to their authors. Suitable papers are peer-reviewed by a minimum of two experts. Peer-reviewers (also known as Referees) are selected for their knowledge and expertise and may include persons from the Editorial Board. Submissions are assessed on the potential interest of new historical discoveries, ideas and methods and significance.

Peer Review

Proofs

Proofs are sent to the corresponding author by e-mail as a PDF file. These should be read carefully, paying particular attention to any tables, figures and references, and then corrected and returned to the Editor-in-Chief by e-mail within ten business days of receipt. Extensive changes at the proof stage are not permitted. In the event of important developments in a field that affect the manuscript arising after the final revision, a ‘Note added in proof’ may be permitted.

Open Access Policy

Copyright

Copyright on published articles is retained by the author(s). The exclusive responsibility in respect of the acknowledgement of author’s rights and/or copyright rests with the responsible author(s). The Editor, publisher and reviewers of this journal cannot accept responsibility for the infringement of authors’ rights or copyright. The author grants the publisher unlimited rights to publish the work in any format and/or medium, whether for gain or any other purpose.

Conflict of Interest

All funding sources supporting the work and all institutional or corporate affiliations are acknowledged. Except as disclosed on a separate attachment, the Author(s) certify that do not have commercial association (e.g., consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent-licensing arrangements) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article, and that the Author(s) accept full responsibility for the conduct of the research, had full access to all the data, and controlled the decision to publish.

Ethics and Malpractice

Publication ethics and malpractice statements for the journal Arheologia Moldovei are based on Publishing ethics resource kit of Elsevier and follows the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics and are based on the guidelines of Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors (COPE)..

The responsibilities of the EDITORIAL BOARD

Publication Decisions

The Editorial Board of our journal is responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal should be published. The Editor-in-Chief’s decision to accept or reject a paper for publication is based on its importance, originality, clarity, and its relevance to the scope of the journal.

Fairness of Assessment

The Editorial Board and the reviewers evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the author’s race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, citizenship, or political ideology.

Confidentiality

The Editorial Board must ensure that all material submitted to the journal remains confidential while under review. The Editorial Board and the editorial staff must not disclose any information about the submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in the submitted manuscript must not be used by the Editorial Board in their own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors should recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers. Editors should require all authors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern.

Journal self citation

An editor should never conduct any practice that obliges authors to cite his or her journal either as an implied or explicit condition of acceptance for publication. Any recommendation regarding articles to be cited in a paper should be made on the basis of direct relevance to the author’s article, with the objective of improving the final published research. Editors should direct authors to relevant literature as part of the peer review process; however this should never extend to blanket instructions to cite individual journals.

Involvement and Cooperation in Investigations

An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies, and if the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant. Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.

Publication decisions

The Editor-in-Chief of the journal is responsible for deciding which of the submitted articles should be published. The Editor-in-Chief may be guided by the policies of the journal’s Editorial Board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

The responsibilities of the REVIEWERS

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method.

Promptness

Any reviewer who feels unqualified to review the manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editorial Board so as to excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review should be treated with strict confidentiality. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except when authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly, with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the author. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. Any similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper should be reported to the Editor-in-Chief.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Privileged information or ideas obtained through the peer review process must be kept confidential and must not be used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other connection with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the manuscript.

The responsibilities of AUTHORS

Reporting Standards

The authors of manuscripts should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the manuscript. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit
others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

Data Access and Retention

The authors may be asked to provide the raw data of their investigations for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data for a reasonable period of time after the publication of their paper.

Originality and Plagiarism

The contributors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, from “passing off” another’s paper as the author’s own paper, 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 behavior and is unacceptable.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

The authors should not submit manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or
grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

Authorship of the Paper

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 contributions should be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are listed in 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.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works

When the author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal as well as to cooperate with the Editor-in-Chief to retract or correct the paper.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.

---