Name | VšĮ Vilniaus universitetas |
Membership Category | Professional Publisher (Small) |
Website | https://www.vu.lt/leidyba/en/ |
Owner | Vilnius University Press is a branch of Vilnius University |
Main Address | 3 Universiteto St., LT-01513 Vilnius, Lithuania |
Other Office Locations | Saulėtekio al. 9, LT-10222, Vilnius, Lithuania |
Copyright and Licensing Link | https://www.vu.lt/leidyba/en/for-authors/editorial-policies
Also every journal has its own more detailed information on copyright information: https://www.journals.vu.lt |
Copyright and Licensing Policy | The authors agree to the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 agreement under which to peer-reviewed journal is licensed, and grants Vilnius University Press permission to publish the unpublished and original manuscript, the abstract forming part thereof, all associated supplemental material, and subsequent, if necessary, errata under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY-4.0). |
Complaint Contact Link | https://www.vu.lt/leidyba/en/about-us2/contacts |
Complaint Policy | No specific policy on complaints. First reaction to any complain has to be within 3 working days. |
Publication Charge Link | For each journal, see e.g. https://www.journals.vu.lt/AML/ |
Publication Charge Policy | We do not charge publication fees |
OASPA Compliant OA Journals | 37 |
OA Articles (approx. number in 12 months) | 300+ |
OASPA Compliant OA Books | |
Peer Review Process Link | |
Peer Review Policy | This journal uses double-blind review, which means that both the reviewer and author identities are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa, throughout the review process. To facilitate this, authors need to ensure that their manuscripts are prepared in a way that does not give away their identity.
Based on the following criteria, the reviewers assess if the paper may be accepted without revisions, with minor or major revisions, or if it should be rejected. The core of any review is an objective assessment of both the technical rigour and the novelty of the presented work.
1. Clarity of thesis statement and declaration of purpose.
2. The relevance of the theoretical discussion and description of the empirical investigation.
3. Reproducible methods of the research and results.
4. Well-founded discussion/analysis.
5. Well-structured and logically coherent composition.
6. Unambiguous and properly analysed data.
7. Data supported by conclusions.
8. The originality of the work. Awareness of relevant research. |
Initiatives |
OASPA
Prins Willem-Alexanderhof 5
2595BE The Hague
Netherlands
Website designed and developed by Studio Seventeen Ltd.
