Revista Universitară de Sociologie (RUS) is a peer-reviewed academic journal committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics and academic integrity. All parties involved in the publication process — editors, reviewers, authors, and the publisher — are required to adhere to ethical principles that ensure transparency, fairness, and scientific responsibility.
This document outlines the ethical standards governing editorial decision-making, peer review, authorship responsibilities, and the management of research integrity.
Non-Plagiarism Declaration
RUS maintains a strict zero-tolerance policy regarding plagiarism, duplicate publication, falsification of data, and any form of academic misconduct. Submitted manuscripts must represent original work that has not been previously published and is not under consideration elsewhere.
A. Editorial Responsibilities
Fairness and Editorial Independence
Editors evaluate manuscripts exclusively on academic merit, including originality, methodological rigor, clarity, and relevance to the journal’s scope. Editorial decisions are made independently and without discrimination based on gender, ethnicity, nationality, institutional affiliation, political views, or personal beliefs.
The Editor-in-Chief has full responsibility for editorial content and publication decisions.
Confidentiality
Editors and editorial staff treat submitted manuscripts as confidential documents. Information about submissions is disclosed only to individuals directly involved in the editorial process.
Conflicts of Interest
Editors must avoid handling manuscripts where conflicts of interest exist. If a conflict arises, editorial responsibility will be reassigned to another qualified editor.
Unpublished materials contained in submitted manuscripts must not be used for personal research without the explicit written consent of the authors.
Publication Decisions
All manuscripts undergo peer review by at least two independent reviewers with expertise in the relevant field. Final publication decisions consider reviewer evaluations, scientific merit, originality, and legal considerations such as copyright compliance and avoidance of plagiarism.
Handling Ethical Concerns
The editorial team investigates all allegations of misconduct. When ethical concerns are confirmed, appropriate actions may include correction, expression of concern, or retraction of the article.
B. Reviewer Responsibilities
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review supports editorial decisions and contributes to improving manuscript quality. Reviewers must provide objective, constructive, and evidence-based evaluations.
Promptness
Reviewers who are unable to complete a review within the required timeframe or who lack appropriate expertise should promptly decline the invitation.
Confidentiality
Manuscripts received for review are confidential and must not be shared or discussed with third parties without editorial authorization.
Objectivity and Professional Conduct
Reviews should be conducted objectively, avoiding personal criticism. Comments should be clearly justified and constructive.
Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant work not cited by the authors and notify editors of any substantial similarity with other publications.
Conflicts of Interest
Reviewers must disclose conflicts of interest and decline review assignments where impartiality cannot be maintained.
C. Author Responsibilities
Reporting Standards
Authors must present accurate, honest, and transparent accounts of research. Manuscripts should contain sufficient detail to allow replication where applicable.
Originality and Plagiarism
Authors must ensure originality and proper citation of all sources. Plagiarism, including unattributed copying or misrepresentation of others’ work, is unacceptable.
Multiple or Concurrent Submission
Manuscripts must not be submitted simultaneously to more than one journal or published elsewhere.
Authorship Criteria
Authorship should be limited to individuals who:
- made significant contributions to the conception or execution of the research;
- participated in drafting or revising the manuscript;
- approved the final version.
Individuals who contributed but do not meet authorship criteria should be acknowledged appropriately.
Data Access and Retention
Authors may be required to provide supporting data for editorial review and should maintain access to research data for a reasonable period after publication.
Conflicts of Interest
Authors must disclose any financial or non-financial conflicts that could influence the research or its interpretation. All funding sources must be declared.
Peer Review Cooperation
Authors are expected to cooperate with peer review by responding to reviewer comments professionally and within established deadlines.
Corrections and Retractions
If significant errors are identified after publication, authors must promptly notify the editors and cooperate in issuing corrections or retractions.
D. Publisher Responsibilities
Handling Research Misconduct
In cases of suspected misconduct, plagiarism, or unethical behaviour, the publisher and editorial team will conduct an investigation and implement appropriate corrective measures, including corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions when necessary.
The journal takes all reasonable steps to prevent the publication of work involving research misconduct and upholds strict ethical standards throughout the publication process.