Submissions

Author Guidelines

We have gathered in this document (PDF) every useful information for our authors.

Work submitted for publication must be original, previously unpublished in any other journal, either digital or print media. In order to ensure the scientific quality, works will be subjected to double-blind peer review fulfilled by two experts of the study field, unaffiliated with both the editorial team and the editorial institution. Originality and the relevance of the scientific information will be considered as criterions of the review process.

LEJANA does not necessary share the opinion of its authors, for that the one and only responsible are their same authors.

The Copyright is exclusive property of their authors (please se below for more details).

EDITING AND PUBLISHING RULES

Works will be published in Spanish or English. The maximum extension will be, in case of papers and articles, of 20 quartos (40.000 characters) and, in case of informative communications, of 10.000 characters. Works submitted have to be edited in MS-Word format with a headline including a short abstract in Spanish and English, together with no more than five keywords in both languages. (Edited works will appear in PDF format.)

Works should be submitted on the journal's homepage in the OJS system, or sent by mail to the following addres: bader.petra@btk.elte.hu.

If it is possible, we kindly ask our authors to send us a digital version of the fictional text object of study.

The Journal does not have any article submission or processing charges (APCs).

The bibliographic references should follow the guideline listed below:

Books: SURNAME(S), First Name(s) (year): Book Title. Place, Publisher.

Book chapters: SURNAME(S), First Name(s) (year): “Chapter Title”. En Name(s) Surname(s) (ed.): Book Title. Place, Publisher: pages.

Journal papers: SURNAME(S), First Name(s) (year): “Article Title”. Journal Title, volume/issue: pages.

Digital references: SURNAME(S), First Name(s) (year): “Article Title”. Web Medium, URL, date.

In case a DOI (Digital Object Identifier) is available, please place it at the end of the reference.

Innertextual bibliographic reference should use the following format: (Surnames, year: page).

In case of including graphic material, it should be presented in jpg format, without exceeding 600px x 500 px.

THE PEER-REVIEW PROCESS

1. All manuscripts considered for publication in Revista Crítica de Narrativa Breve must undergo a double-blind peer review process and approval by the Editorial Board.
2. Submitted manuscripts will be reviewed by the editors to determine if the reflect the aims and scope of the journal, and to check the appropriateness of the format. Manuscripts that do not meet the criteria outlined by the journal will not be considered for publication, and authors will be informed of this decision.
3. If a manuscript meets the required criteria, it will be forwarded to two reviewers. The review process should be done in 6 weeks from the date of the reviewers receive the manuscript.
4. The review process is anonymous for the author and the reviewers.
5. Reviewers and members of the Editorial Board must keep all reviewed material confidential. Reviewers and editors must not share materials submitted for review with third parties.
6. All reviewers have expertise in areas reflected in the submitted material and have published in the field in recent years. Reviewers may be selected from among the members of the Editorial Committee and among experts from various research and higher education institutions across the country and abroad. If the manuscript is of any interdisciplinary nature, experts from appropriate fields may be invited to take part in the review process.
7. Neither the author nor any of the co-authors are permitted to be reviewers of their manuscript or any other articles to be published in the same issue. Academic supervisors of graduate students or colleagues from the institution where the author is currently employed cannot be invited as reviewers. Invited reviewers must inform the Editorial Board about any potential conflict of interests.
8. The review should include an expert analysis of the material, an objective and well-supported evaluation and constructive recommendations, following a predetermined formulary. The review should be concluded with a final decision concerning the suitability of the manuscript for publication as follows: a) the manuscript is recommended for publication; b) the manuscript is recommended for publication following revision; c) the manuscript is not recommended for publication.
9. In the event of a positive assessment from both reviewers, the manuscript should be approved by the Editorial Board. Upon acceptance, the authors will be informed by email. This email may include a list of suggested revisions. The Editorial Board retains the right to reject the manuscript even if a positive assessment was given by both reviewers; authors of such manuscripts will be fully informed of the reasons for rejection.
10. In the event of negative assessments from both reviewers, the authors will be provided with the reasons for rejection. In the event of two conflicting reviews, the final decision concerning the manuscript will be made by the editor-in-chief. In the event of disagreement between the reviewers, the manuscript may be forwarded to a third independent expert.
11. Reviews will be sent anonymously to authors on request.
12. Reviews will be kept for a period of 5 years.