Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

The special focus of the Journal is devoted to the publishing of articles within scientific disciplines, such as:

• Physical Geography (Geomorphology; Hydrology; Biogeography; Environmental geography; Glaciology; Climatology; Meteorology; Geology; Pedology; Palaeogeography; and related scientific disciplines) and

• Human Geography (Demography; Urban geography; Regional geography; Economic geography; Geopolitics; Cultural geography; Tourism geography; Spatial planning; Human-environmental geography; GIS; Cartography; and related scientific disciplines).


 

Section Policies

Original scientific article

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Review

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Communication

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Letter

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Research note

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Book review

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Corrigendum

Checked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

In memoriam

Checked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Retraction

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

All articles published in the Journal of the Geographical Institute “Jovan Cvijić” SASA undergo a rigorous double-blind peer-review process. The first review is based on an initial editor screening, which is followed by a more detailed review by at least two anonymous reviewers. Each submitted manuscript is evaluated on the following basis:

  • the originality of its contribution to the field of scholarly publishing;
  • the soundness of its theory and methodology gave the topic;
  • the coherence of its analysis;
  • its ability to communicate to readers (grammar and style).
The choice of reviewers is at the Editor-in-Chief’s discretion. The reviewers must be knowledgeable about the subject area of the manuscript; they must not be from the Authors’ own institution and they should not have recent joint publications with any of the Authors. Reviews must be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents.

Once the manuscript is accepted for publication, authors shall transfer the copyright to the Publisher. If the submitted manuscript is not accepted for publication by the Journal, all rights shall be retained by the author(s). Authors grant to the Publisher the following rights to the manuscript, including any supplemental material, and any parts, extracts or elements thereof:

  • the right to reproduce and distribute the Manuscript in printed form, including print-on-demand;
  • the right to reproduce the Manuscript using photomechanical or similar means including, but not limited to photocopy, and the right to distribute these reproductions;
  • the right to reproduce and distribute the Manuscript electronically or optically on any and all data carriers or storage media – especially in machine-readable/digitalized form on data carriers such as hard drive, CD-Rom, DVD, Blu-ray Disc (BD), Mini-Disk, data tape – and the right to reproduce and distribute the Article via these data carriers;
  • the right to store the Manuscript in databases, including online databases, and the right of transmission of the Manuscript in all technical systems and modes;
  • the right to make the Manuscript available to the public or to closed user groups on individual demand, for use on monitors or other readers (including e-books), and in printable form for the user, either via the internet, other online services, or via internal or external networks.

The Journal allows authors to deposit Publisher's version/PDF in an institutional repository and non-commercial subject-based repositories, or to publish it on Author's personal website (including social networking sites) and/or departmental website, at any time after publication. Publisher copyright and source must be acknowledged, and a link must be made to the article's DOI (HTML link).

Peer reviewers should

  • Only agree to review articles for which they have the subject expertise required to carry out a proper assessment and which they can assess in a timely manner;
  • Respect the confidentiality of peer review and not reveal any details of an article or its review, during or after the peer-review process, beyond those that are released by the journal;
  • Not use information obtained during the peer-review process for their own or any other person’s or organization’s advantage, or to disadvantage or discredit others;
  • Declare all potential conflicting interests, seeking advice from the journal if they are unsure whether something constitutes a relevant interest;
  • Not allow their reviews to be influenced by the origins of an article, by the nationality, religious or political beliefs, gender or other characteristics of the authors, or by commercial considerations;
  • Be objective and constructive in their reviews, refraining from being hostile or inflammatory and from making libelous or derogatory personal comments;
  • Acknowledge that peer review is largely a reciprocal endeavor and undertake to carry out their fair share of reviewing and in a timely manner;
  • Provide journals with personal and professional information that is accurate and a true representation of their expertise;
  • Recognize that impersonation of another individual during the review process is considered serious misconduct.

Initial phase

Before start the revision process, if there is any conflict of interest, lack of expertise in a concrete scientific area, or you need extra time, please notify the Editor-in-Chief. Each received article is forwarded to two independent reviewers – double-blind peer-review process (reviewers do not know who the author of the article is, the author does not know who are the reviewers of his article). We insist on anonymity because we believe that this procedure will contribute to more independent, more critical and better examination papers. If you are unable to comply with deadlines, please inform without delay notify the Editor-in-Chief. The typical period of time allowed for reviews is four to five weeks. If the decisions of the two reviewers are not the same (accept/reject), the Editor-in-Chief may assign additional reviewer(s). The purpose of peer review is to assists the Editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author it may also assist the author in improving the paper. The reviewer does not have the rights to the content of the paper, the other, or that data from the article that benefits are reviewed for any purpose. Reviewers have an obligation to care about ethical issues. If the paper is plagiarized or if the same title published in another journal or proceedings, please inform without delay notify the Editor-in-Chief. At the beginning of the reviewer form, the reviewer states his name, title, and full name of the institution where he or she works. These data are confidential, remain with the editorial board and they will not be sent to the author of the article, in addition to the required corrections, suggestions and complaints if any.

Investigate the journal’s content

The first detail you need is to observe the originality, relevance, presentation, and importance of the article. Visit the Authors’ Guidelines on the Journal’s homepage to see if the paper meets the submission criteria of the journal. This will help you in deciding whether the paper being reviewed is suitable or not. In the review form that you get, write your opinion - report on the quantitative work. The first question should be: Is the article in line with the aims and scope of the journal?

Organization and clarity

The Title, Abstract and Keywords: Do they clearly describe the article? Do they reflect the content of the article?

Introduction: Does it describe what the author hoped to achieve accurately, and clearly state the problem being investigated? Normally, the introduction should summarize relevant research to provide context and explain what other authors' findings, if any, are being challenged or extended. It should describe the experiment, the hypotheses and the general experimental design or method.

Method: Does the author accurately explain how the data was collected? Is the design suitable for answering the question posed? Is there sufficient information present for you to replicate the research? Does the article identify the procedures followed? Are these ordered in a meaningful way? If the methods are new, are they explained in detail? Was the sampling appropriate? Have the equipment and materials been adequately described? Does the article make it clear what type of data was recorded; has the author been precise in describing measurements?

Results and discussion: This is where the author/s should explain in words what he/she discovered in the research. It should be clearly laid out and in a logical sequence. You will need to consider if the appropriate analysis has been conducted. Are the statistics correct? If you are not comfortable with statistics, please advise the editor when you submit your report. Interpretation of results should not be included in this section.

Conclusion: Are the claims in this section supported by the results, do they seem reasonable? Have the authors indicated how the results relate to expectations and earlier research? Does the article support or contradict previous theories? Does the conclusion explain how the research has moved the body of scientific knowledge forward?

Tables, Figures, Images: Are they appropriate? Do they properly show the data? Are they easy to interpret and understand?

How to write your report

Complete all review questions in the report form. Write your report on the quantities work. Your report does not have to agree with the author’s attitudes. If so, make clear suggestions to the author in order to improve clarity, succinctness, and the overall quality of presentation. First of all, try to clarify whether the article fits within the scope of the journal, whether the article is an original, whether the research helps to expand further research in this area and would this article be of interest for reading the journal. If you find an answer on some of these questions, do not re-authorize the author to send it in a related journal. Also, see if the article is in standard English, whether the original research has the IMRAD method, whether there is an abstract of the article, as well as the concluding section.

Make a recommendation

After you finished reading the paper and have assessed its quality, you need to make a recommendation to the Editor-in-Chief regarding publication. You should make one of the next decisions:

  • Accept the article without further revision – if the article is suitable for publication in its current form.
  • Accept after minor revision – if the article will be ready for publication after light revisions.
  • Accept after major revision – the article needs a lot of changes and needs to submit the article again.
  • Reject – if the paper is suitable for publication in the journal.

Revised papers

When authors revise their article in response to reviewer’s comments, they should be asked to resubmit a list of changes and any comments for transmission to the reviewers. If possible, the revised version is usually returned to the original reviewer who is then asked to affirm whether the revisions have been carried out satisfactorily.

What if you cannot make a review

If you cannot make a review you should immediately notify the editorial office that you cannot do this job. If you are unable to complete your report on a paper in the agreed time-frame inform the editorial office as soon as possible so that the refereeing procedure is not delayed.

 

 

Publication Frequency

Three times a year (in April, August and December).

 

Open Access Policy

This Journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

 

Self-archiving Policy

Journal of the Geographical Institute “Jovan Cvijić” SASA (J. Geogr. Inst. Cvijic) allows authors to deposit Publisher's version/PDF in an institutional repository and non-commercial subject-based repositories, or to publish it on Author's personal website (including social networking sites) and/or departmental website, at any time after publication in compliance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial – NoDerrivatives 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Publisher copyright and source must be acknowledged and a link must be made to the article's DOI (HTML link).

 

 

Editorial Responsibilities

Editors’ responsibilities

The Editors are responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the Journal of the Geographical Institute “Jovan Cvijić” SASA will be published. The Editors are guided by the policies of the Journal's Editorial Board and constrained by legal requirements in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.

Editors must hold no conflict of interest regarding the articles they consider for publication. If an Editors feel that there is likely to be a perception of a conflict of interest in relation to their handling of a submission, the selection of reviewers and all decisions on the paper shall be made by the Editorial Board. Editors have a responsibility to protect the anonymity of reviewers and/or Authors as per the highest academic standards. Editors shall evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content free from any racial, gender, sexual, religious, ethnic, or political bias. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an Editors’ own research without the express written consent of the author.

Publisher’s responsibilities

A Publisher is committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenues have no impact or influence on editorial decisions. The Publisher may assist in communication with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful to Editors. The Publisher is working with other publishers and associations in order to set standards for best practices on ethical matters, errors and retractions. The publisher is prepared to provide specialized legal review and counsel if necessary.

 

Authors’ responsibilities

Authors warrant that their manuscript is their original work that it has not been published before and is not under consideration for publication elsewhere. The Authors also warrant that the manuscript is not and will not be published elsewhere (after the publication in Journal of the Geographical Institute “Jovan Cvijić” SASA) in any other language, without the consent of the copyright holder.

Authors warrant that the rights of third parties will not be violated and that the publisher will not be held legally responsible should there be any claims for compensation. Authors are exclusively responsible for the contents of their submissions, the validity of the experimental results and must make sure that they have permission from all involved parties to make the data public.

Authors wishing to include figures or text passages that have already been published elsewhere are required to obtain permission from the copyright holder(s) and to include evidence that such permission has been granted when submitting their papers. Any material received without such evidence will be assumed to originate from the Authors. Authors must make sure that all only contributors who have significantly contributed to the submission are listed as Authors and, conversely, that all contributors who have significantly contributed to the submission are listed as Authors.

It is the responsibility of each author to ensure that papers submitted to the Journal of the Geographical Institute “Jovan Cvijić” SASA, are written with ethical standards in mind and that they not contain plagiarism. Authors affirm that the article contains no unfounded or unlawful statements and does not violate the rights of others. When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the Journal Editor or publisher and cooperate with the Editor to retract or correct the paper.

 

Reviewers’ responsibilities

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. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest.

The selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviews should be conducted objectively. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the Authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation.

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

 

Disclaimer

The opinions expressed in the texts published are the author’s own and do not necessarily express the views of Journal's editors. The Authors assume all responsibility for the ideas expressed in the materials published. Authors warrant that the rights of third parties will not be violated and that the publisher will not be held legally responsible should there be any claims for compensation. Authors wishing to include figures or tables that have already been published elsewhere are required to obtain permission from the copyright holder(s) and to include evidence that such permission has been granted when submitting their papers. Any material received without such evidence will be assumed to originate from the Authors. It is the responsibility of each author to ensure that submitted papers are written with ethical standards in mind and that they not contain plagiarism. When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published article, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the Journal Editors or Publisher and cooperate with the Editors to retract or correct the paper.