Central European Journal of International and Security Studies

Ethical Guidelines

Central European Journal of International and Security Studies (CEJISS, the Journal) is committed to publishing high-quality research and upholding the integrity of the scientific record. To meet this objective, the peer review and publication processes should be transparent, impartial, and fair. The Ethical Guidelines discuss the role and responsibilities of Authors, Reviewers, the CEJISS Editorial Team and other bodies of the Journal. They are intended to uphold and implement good practices and standards relevant to International Relations, other Social Sciences and academic knowledge production. In particular, they are inspired by the COPE Core Practices.

If you have any questions regarding these guidelines and their application, please contact the CEJISS Editorial Team.

  • 1.1 CEJISS follows a double-blind review process. All the parties involved in the peer review process (CEJISS Editorial Team, Authors, Reviewers) should respect the confidentiality of the review process.
  • 1.2 All research article manuscripts are peer-reviewed, including submissions to special issues and thematic sections. The formal and substantive requirements applicable to submissions and relevant guidelines are described here.
  • 1.3 All the parties involved in the peer review process (CEJISS Editorial Team, Authors, Reviewers) or any other party that cooperates with CEJISS should comply with all relevant legislation.
  • 1.4 CEJISS is committed to publishing all of its content as open access material.
  • 1.5 Articles are published under the CC BY 4.0 licence. More specific policies and information regarding copyright and publishing licenses are specified here.
  • 1.6 CEJISS does not charge any article processing fees or other publication-related charges.
  • 1.7 CEJISS does not accept articles authored or co-authored by any form of AI (see section 2.1 on authorship). However, AI, in its different forms, may be used as a supplementary tool for purposes that may include but are not necessarily limited to proofreading or facilitating data collection. Sections 2.16 and 4.11 provide additional information related to the usage of AI.
  • 1.8 In situations which cannot be dealt with based on the following guidelines, CEJISS will refer to the practices and recommendations of COPE.

The Ethical Guidelines are prepared by the CEJISS Editorial Team. Any major change needs to be approved by the CEJISS Editorial Board. The CEJISS Ethical Committee can suggest changes and improvements.

Authors

  • 2.1 To be defined as an Author, one needs to contribute to the development of the academic content of a given article – i.e. make a significant contribution to the concept, design, acquisition, analysis or interpretation of data – and at the same time be actively engaged in the process of composing and expressing the academic content of the article in the written form.
    • All listed Authors must also approve the final version of the article for publication and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work and resolve any issues related to its accuracy or integrity. 
    • The authorship of submitted articles should accurately reflect individuals’ contributions to the work.
    • Minor contributions by other people or AI tools (such as data coding, commenting or reviewing earlier versions of the paper) should be stated in the manuscript Acknowledgements.
    • In the case of co-authored manuscripts, we ask the Authors to declare their contribution.
  • 2.2 The manuscript may not be submitted to more than one journal for simultaneous consideration.
  • 2.3 The submitted paper should be original and should not have been published in any other journal or book in any form or language (partially or in full).
    • Authors are expected to disclose any prior publication or distribution of their manuscript to the CEJISS Editorial Team when submitting their manuscript to the Journal.
    • However, Authors are allowed to deposit their work at any stage in an institutional or other repository of their choice. Hence, depositing their work in a repository does not preclude publication of the given work in CEJISS and is not considered by CEJISS as a duplicate publication.
    • Guidelines for depositing papers in repositories are defined here.
    • In cases of uncertainty regarding what constitutes redundant (duplicate) publication, both the Author and the CEJISS Editorial Team should consult these principles established by COPE.
  • 2.4 Research outputs have to be presented clearly, honestly, and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data and image manipulation.
  • 2.5 Authors are expected to cite others' works and ideas, even if they are not quoted verbatim or paraphrased. All research articles must cite appropriate literature and resources in support of the claims made. Proper acknowledgements to other works must be given and permissions secured for copyrighted material.
    • Excessive self-citation in order to inflate the citation count or citation cartels are strongly discouraged.
  • 2.6 Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and leads to the manuscript rejection.
    • CEJISS defines plagiarism as the passing off of another’s work as one’s own. In its simplest form, plagiarism may be verbatim copying, but paraphrasing of text, tables, figures or even ideas without proper citation also constitutes an infringement.
    • It may also lead to the article retraction (see also 4.9).
    • Moreover, the Authors may be barred from further submitting to CEJISS.
  • 2.7 Authors should adhere to discipline-specific rules for acquiring, selecting, and processing data.
  • 2.8 Authors are asked to share data, datasets, and analytical materials created for the purposes of the submitted manuscript in order to support transparency and reproducibility of research. Authors are encouraged to use established public repositories, such as Zenodo, where appropriate. Data sharing may be limited where legal, ethical, security, confidentiality, or sensitivity concerns apply. Nevertheless, in such cases, the CEJISS Editorial Team reserves the right to request access to the relevant data and analytical materials for the purposes of internal evaluation, verification, and editorial inspection.
  • 2.9 Authors are welcome to suggest suitable reviewers. When suggesting reviewers, authors should make sure they are completely independent and not connected to the work in any way. Authors may also request that certain Reviewers not be used. Please note that the Journal may not follow the suggestions.
  • 2.10 Authors should not reveal themselves to the reviewers. Authors should be prompt with their manuscript revisions. If an Author cannot meet the deadline given, they should contact the Editor as soon as possible to determine whether the deadline should be extended or whether the paper should be withdrawn from the review process.
  • 2.11 Funding sources and relevant conflicts of interest should be disclosed. For more information on declaring conflict of interest, see here.
  • 2.12 Authors are expected to eliminate biases in relation to gender, age, racial and ethnic background, sexual orientation, disability status, and socioeconomic status. Any potential biases of these kinds will be carefully examined by the CEJISS Editorial Team.
  • 2.13 Authors may withdraw the submitted manuscript at any time before CEJISS starts the production of the manuscript. The production of the article begins once the article is unconditionally accepted for publication and ends when the article appears on the CEJISS website.
  • 2.14 During the production of the article, Authors are informed about changes suggested by CEJISS (e.g. after language editing or final editorial suggestions) and is/are presented with the final form and content of the article. Authors shall approve the final form and content of the article while Authors can still suggest changes and corrections during this phase. However, these changes and corrections should not alter the article’s academic content in a significant way.
  • 2.15 Authors may request the CEJISS Editorial Team to correct or retract an already published article. In this situation, the principles stipulated below (see 4.8 and 4.9 of the Ethical Guidelines) should be followed. Requests of this character should be raised in a timely manner, ideally no later than five days after the article appeared on the CEJISS website for the first time. Requests raised later than that shall be considered by the CEJISS Editorial Team only if they are specifically justified. Authors are obliged to cooperate with the CEJISS Editorial Team when the article is being corrected or retracted.
  • 2.16 If AI is used as a supplementary tool, the Authors need to disclose and describe which AI tools were used and in which exact manner. The Authors are also supposed to check all input generated by AI as they remain fully responsible for the article’s factual and citation accuracy, reasoning and originality. If asked by the CEJISS Editorial Team, the Authors are expected to submit supplementary material, including logs of interactions between the Authors and the AI interface.
  • 2.17 Authors wishing to publish anonymously must submit a formal request to the CEJISS Editorial Team. All requests for anonymity, along with the reasons for them, will be treated confidentially. All the requests will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis by the CEJISS Editorial Team and Editorial Board. Relevant reasons for anonymous publishing include personal safety, privacy concerns and other sensitive circumstances. Relevant policies and recommendations established by COPE should be taken into account.

Reviewers

  • 3.1 Reviewers should agree to review a manuscript only if they have appropriate subject expertise and sufficient time to complete the review, in accordance with the journal deadline.
  • 3.2 Corresponding to our definition of authorship (see sections 1.7 and 2.1), reviews cannot be authored by AI tools.
  • 3.3 Reviewers should not reveal themselves to the Authors.
  • 3.4 Reviews are intended to consider the quality of submissions and specify how their quality can be improved. The primary goal of reviews is to provide constructive feedback. Reviewers can follow these guidelines.
  • 3.5 Reviewers shall keep recommendations to use their work to a minimum.
  • 3.6 Reviewers are expected to respect the confidentiality of the review process and abstain from any breach of confidentiality.
    • Until published, all the submissions should be treated as works that are shared privately between Authors, Reviewers, and the CEJISS Editorial Team. As such, they cannot be disseminated.
    • For the same reason, submissions should not be shared with any AI platform.
  • 3.7 Reviewers are expected to indicate any conflict of interest. For more information on declaring conflict of interest, see here.

CEJISS Editorial Team

  • 4.1 The final decision regarding accepting or rejecting manuscripts rests with the CEJISS Editorial Team. Comments and suggestions of the CEJISS Editorial Team represent an integral part of the peer review process.
  • 4.2 The CEJISS Editorial Team has a responsibility to explain Authors their decision on a manuscript.
  • 4.3 The CEJISS Editorial Team is supposed to ensure that the Ethical Guidelines are followed and met at all stages of the submission, review, and publishing process. This includes their responsibility to follow conflict of interest principles.
  • 4.4 The CEJISS Editorial Team is responsible for managing and overseeing the peer review process and its quality.
  • 4.5 The CEJISS Editorial Team may consult any ethical question with the Steering Committee and the Editorial Board of CEJISS. In their decisions or recommendations, the Steering Committee and the Editorial Board are expected to follow the general principles specified by the Ethical Guidelines including transparency, impartiality, and fairness.
  • 4.6 The CEJISS Editorial Team shall communicate promptly with Authors and Reviewers. It shall be ready to clarify principles of the Ethical Guidelines to them.
  • 4.7 The CEJISS Editorial Team is responsible for checking manuscripts for any signs of plagiarism. Crossref Similarity Check is used to do so.
  • 4.8 The CEJISS Editorial Team may publish a corrected version of an already published article or an erratum to remedy mistakes or clarify information. If a corrected version of the article is published, the online version of the article shall include a notification that the article has been republished and shall indicate the character of the changes. Publishing a corrected article is mainly intended for cases when the academic content of the article is not impacted, when minor changes are introduced and when the corrected version can be published shortly after the article appeared on the CEJISS website for the first time. Publishing an erratum should be preferred if there is a noticeable time span between the original publication and the moment when the correction is to be published. Should the article’s academic content be impacted, the CEJISS Editorial Board needs to approve the publication of its corrected version or an erratum, and there should be a specifically justified reason for doing so.
  • 4.9 The CEJISS Editorial Team may retract an already published article in exceptional circumstances. These circumstances may include cases when fundamental research, legal or ethical flaws are revealed, including but not limited to data manipulation and plagiarism. The CEJISS Editorial Team’s decision to retract an article needs to be confirmed by the CEJISS Editorial Board. This decision should follow the Journal’s Ethical Guidelines while the COPE retraction guidelines should be consulted.
  • 4.10 The CEJISS Editorial Team shall not accept any fees for publishing or processing a manuscript from Authors.
  • 4.11 In the case of suspected misuse of AI, the CEJISS Editorial Team retains the right to decide about the publication or rejection of a given article without the necessity of conclusively proving such misuse. However, the Editorial Team should provide Authors with an explanation of its decision.

Other Bodies of the Journal

  • 5.1 Other bodies of the Journal include the Steering Committee, Editorial Board and Ethical Committee. Their role is defined here.
  • 5.2 These bodies are expected to follow and support the Ethical Guidelines, their individual principles and the overall philosophy.
  • 5.3 Members of these bodies may occasionally submit manuscripts to CEJISS. However, in such instances, they will be fully separated from all aspects and stages of the manuscript evaluation process. Regular submissions of members of these bodies to CEJISS are prohibited.
  • 5.4 The Ethical Committee is tasked with handling potential allegations of misconduct, complaints concerning the Journal or its bodies (Editorial Team, Steering Committee, Editorial Board), appeals related to publication ethics, and other related issues. The Ethical Committee may also initiate its own investigation if it becomes aware of potential ethical concerns.  In addressing such cases, the Committee recommends and co-decides on appropriate measures in conjunction with the other relevant bodies of the Journal. In particularly serious cases, the Ethical Committee may reach out directly to the publisher (Metropolitan University Prague and MUP Press, as its department under which the Journal is established). See also 6.1.

Appeals, Concerns, and Allegations

  • 6.1 Allegations of misconduct, complaints concerning the Journal or its bodies, appeals related to publication ethics, and other related ethical concerns may be raised by Authors, Reviewers, members of all CEJISS bodies or anyone outside the Journal. Such claims are primarily handled by the CEJISS Ethical Committee (see also 5.1 and 5.4). Similarly, allegations raised by whistleblowers should be referred to the Ethical Committee. The Ethical Committee should ensure that such allegations are properly reviewed, are not disregarded or sidelined internally, and are subject to appropriate investigation.
  • 6.2 The Ethical Committee is required not to reveal the identity of claimants or whistleblowers if they ask for it or if it can be reasonably expected that the revelation of their identity will be harmful to them.

Post-Publication

  • 7.1 CEJISS supports post-publication discussion of articles published in the Journal through the PubPeer platform.
    • In cases involving serious concerns, we strongly recommend that these concerns are also communicated directly to the Journal – the CEJISS Editorial Team or the Ethical Committee.
    • Such concerns may be submitted anonymously. In these cases, the Journal’s Ethical Committee should be contacted. The Ethical Committee will forward the concern to the appropriate bodies within the Journal while ensuring that the claimant’s identity is not revealed.
  • 7.2 In relevant instances, articles published in CEJISS may be corrected or retracted. For more specific procedures and information, see the aforementioned sections: 2.15, 4.8 and 4.9.

Relationship of the Journal to the Publisher

  • 8.1 The Journal is published by Metropolitan University Prague. While members of the Journal’s Editorial Team and Steering Committee are employees of the publisher, the Editorial Board and Ethical Committee function as external advisory bodies and are therefore composed mainly of scholars and experts affiliated with other institutions. However, some of the Editorial Board's and the Ethical Committee’s members may be affiliated with Metropolitan University Prague, provided that they are otherwise independent of the Journal.

Sources

 

(Last update: 2 June 2026)