e-JBL adheres to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) standards on publication ethics. Submission of an article implies that:
|•||The work described has not been published previously except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture or academic thesis.|
|•||That it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere.|
|•||That its submission and publication in the journal is known and approved by all Authors.|
|•||The work is the Author’s own and there is no falsification, fabrication of data or plagiarism, including duplicate publication of the authors’ own work without proper citation.|
Any cases of ethical misconduct are treated very seriously and will be dealt with using the guidelines issued by the COPE. For further details please visit:
|•||Code of Conduct for Journal Editors|
|•||Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers|
Upon acceptance of an article, Authors will be asked to transfer copyright. This transfer will ensure the widest possible dissemination of information. A notification will be sent to the corresponding Author confirming receipt of the manuscript.
If excerpts from other copyrighted works are included, the Author(s) must obtain written permission from the copyright owners and credit the source(s) in the article.
|OPEN ACCESS POLICY|
e-JBL is an open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) definition of open access.
|REVIEW OF MANUSCRIPT|
e-JBL practices double-blind academic review; both author and reviewer are unknown to one another. Every submitted manuscript, if deemed appropriate, will go through a review process that involved a minimum of one reviewer to a maximum of three reviewers. The number of reviewers is at the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief in consultation with the Editorial Panel. The review may be lengthy, but all efforts are made to ensure that an outcome be made known to the author at the soonest possible time. Delays are often commonplace as reviewers are working academics with heavy work commitments. Patience on the part of authors is greatly appreciated.