The European Hebrew Journal (EHJ) is committed to maintaining high standards of publication ethics, academic integrity, editorial independence, transparency, and scholarly responsibility.
EHJ follows internationally recognized principles of ethical scholarly publishing, including the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing and relevant guidance developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), where applicable.
This statement applies to all participants involved in the publication process, including authors, reviewers, editors, editorial board members, and the publisher.
EHJ publishes original scholarly research in Hebrew language studies, Biblical Hebrew, Semitic linguistics, philology, textual criticism, manuscript studies, Jewish studies, theology, Dead Sea Scrolls research, lexicography, translation studies, and related interdisciplinary fields.
Editors are responsible for ensuring fair, confidential, unbiased, and academically rigorous evaluation of submitted manuscripts.
Editorial decisions are based exclusively on:
• originality;
• methodological rigor;
• scholarly significance;
• clarity of argumentation;
• relevance to the journal’s aims and scope;
• contribution to existing scholarship.
Editorial decisions are independent of authors’ nationality, institutional affiliation, ethnicity, religion, gender, political views, or personal characteristics.
Editors are responsible for:
• supervising the peer review process;
• selecting qualified reviewers;
• maintaining confidentiality;
• preventing conflicts of interest;
• ensuring editorial fairness;
• responding appropriately to suspected misconduct.
Editors and editorial board members must not use unpublished material from submitted manuscripts without explicit author permission.
EHJ operates a rigorous double-blind peer review system involving at least two independent reviewers for each research manuscript.
Under this process:
• reviewers do not know the identity of authors;
• authors do not know the identity of reviewers.
Reviewers evaluate manuscripts according to:
• originality;
• methodological quality;
• scholarly significance;
• clarity of analysis;
• accuracy of references and evidence;
• contribution to existing scholarship.
Editorial decisions may include:
• acceptance;
• minor revisions;
• major revisions;
• rejection.
Final publication decisions are made by the Editor-in-Chief, or a non-conflicted handling editor where recusal is required, following consideration of the reviewers' recommendations.
Reviewers are expected to:
• maintain confidentiality;
• provide objective and constructive evaluations;
• avoid personal criticism;
• disclose conflicts of interest;
• decline review when expertise is insufficient;
• identify possible plagiarism, duplicate publication, or ethical concerns.
Reviewers must not use unpublished information obtained through peer review for personal advantage.
Authors submitting manuscripts to EHJ confirm that:
• submitted work is original;
• manuscripts are not simultaneously under review elsewhere;
• all sources are appropriately acknowledged;
• all co-authors approve submission;
• permissions for copyrighted materials have been obtained;
• relevant funding and conflicts of interest are disclosed.
Authors remain responsible for:
• accuracy of research;
• citations and references;
• translations and interpretations;
• scholarly claims;
• compliance with ethical standards.
Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made substantial scholarly contributions to the manuscript.
The following practices are unacceptable:
• ghost authorship;
• honorary authorship;
• guest authorship;
• omission of legitimate contributors;
• false attribution of responsibility.
All listed authors must approve the submitted manuscript.
EHJ maintains zero tolerance toward plagiarism and academic misconduct.
Misconduct includes:
• plagiarism;
• self-plagiarism without disclosure;
• duplicate publication;
• fabricated data;
• manipulated evidence;
• falsified citations;
• undeclared conflicts of interest;
• misleading representation of authorship or affiliation.
Suspected misconduct may result in:
• rejection;
• withdrawal of accepted manuscripts;
• correction notices;
• expressions of concern;
• retraction;
• notification of affiliated institutions where appropriate.
EHJ reserves the right to investigate suspected ethical violations.
Authors must disclose generative AI use beyond straightforward language correction, editing, and formatting, identifying the tool, purpose, and affected parts. AI systems cannot be authors or cited as scholarly sources. Authors must verify generated claims, references, translations, data, and images and remain responsible for originality, accuracy, and ethical compliance. Undisclosed substantial AI use may constitute misconduct.
Reviewers and editors must not use generative AI to produce manuscript assessments or editorial judgments. Confidential manuscripts, review reports, personal data, and editorial correspondence must not be uploaded to external AI services. Any permitted assistance with editing or rewriting an assessment must be disclosed to the handling editor and must preserve confidentiality; responsibility remains with the human reviewer or editor.
Any routine editorial use of automated tools must be publicly disclosed, with its purpose and human oversight. Tools must be appropriately tested. A responsible editor or staff member must verify automated integrity flags and reviewer suggestions. Automated output cannot determine acceptance, rejection, or misconduct findings without human assessment.
Authors, editors, and reviewers must disclose relationships or circumstances that could influence scholarly judgment.
Potential conflicts include:
• financial interests;
• institutional affiliations;
• personal relationships;
• recent collaborations;
• professional competition.
Failure to disclose relevant conflicts may result in editorial action.
An editor or editorial board member who is an author, a close collaborator, or otherwise materially conflicted must not select reviewers or take part in the editorial decision for that manuscript. A non-conflicted editor handles the review and decision. These safeguards also apply to guest editors.
Financial support and paid advertising are governed by the Funding, Revenue Transparency, and Editorial Independence policy. Advertising must be clearly labelled and separate from scholarly content. Payments cannot influence scholarly book reviews, reviewer selection, manuscript decisions, publication timing, corrections, retractions, complaints, or appeals. Relevant advertiser relationships are disclosed, and materially conflicted persons are excluded from the affected assessment or decision.
Where applicable, authors are expected to describe the sources, data, manuscripts, archival materials, translations, or other evidence on which their research is based.
Research involving human participants, interviews, personal data, sensitive community materials, or restricted archival sources must comply with applicable ethical, legal, and institutional requirements.
Authors are responsible for obtaining any necessary approvals, permissions, or consent related to the materials used in their research.
Research manuscripts must include a Data and Materials Availability statement under the Research Data, Materials, and Source Availability policy. Public sharing is encouraged where lawful, ethical, and practicable; legitimate copyright, archival, consent, privacy, or other restrictions must be explained. Studies relying only on cited published sources may state that no new research dataset was generated. Identifying repository or contact information is kept separate during double-blind review.
A disclosed preprint is eligible for consideration under the Preprints and Prior Dissemination policy. It does not waive originality, rights, peer-review, or the prohibition on simultaneous journal submission. Authors must not represent an unreviewed preprint as an EHJ-reviewed publication.
Authors, readers, reviewers, and other interested parties may report concerns about published content to office@hebrew.edu.rs, identifying the article, DOI or URL, relevant passages, and supporting evidence. EHJ assesses concerns impartially and normally gives affected authors an opportunity to respond. Credible, verifiable concerns may be considered regardless of when the article was published.
A correction addresses a material error or omission when the article remains substantially reliable. An expression of concern alerts readers to a significant unresolved question while evidence or an investigation remains incomplete. Retraction is appropriate when serious error, plagiarism, unethical research, or a compromised publication process makes the work unreliable or its publication unjustifiable. Honest error and misconduct are distinguished where the evidence permits.
Formal notices identify the article, explain the reason and extent of the action, are dated and freely accessible, and link to the article; the article record links back to the notice. Retracted articles remain available and clearly marked, except where exceptional legal, privacy, or safety grounds require removal or restriction. Any such action retains an explanatory public record where legally permissible.
Material changes are not made silently. Corrected full-text versions are clearly identified, and affected metadata are updated. Minor technical or typographical changes that do not affect meaning, attribution, or reliability may be corrected directly.
An appeal requests reconsideration of a specific editorial decision; a complaint concerns conduct, procedure, confidentiality, conflicts of interest, or compliance with journal policies. Send either in writing to office@hebrew.edu.rs, identifying the manuscript or article, the disputed matter, supporting evidence, and the requested outcome.
Appeals should identify a material factual misunderstanding, procedural error, overlooked evidence, or unmanaged conflict. Disagreement with scholarly judgement alone does not normally justify reconsideration. An upheld appeal may lead to independent reassessment or additional review; it does not guarantee acceptance.
A non-conflicted editor or senior Editorial Board member who did not make the disputed decision assesses the relevant records and responses. Where the matter concerns the Editor-in-Chief, the publisher, or another conflicted person, that person must not control the investigation or outcome. Independent external advice may be sought when suitable internal expertise or independence is unavailable.
EHJ communicates a reasoned outcome and explains substantial delays. Information is shared only as needed for assessment, preserving reviewer anonymity and other legitimate confidentiality. Good-faith complainants and appellants must not suffer retaliation. Material new evidence may justify further consideration.
EHJ welcomes evidence-based scholarly criticism and responses concerning published work. Readers may submit a reasoned commentary to office@hebrew.edu.rs. The editorial team assesses its relevance, evidence, tone, and suitability and may seek independent review. Authors are normally invited to respond. Accepted commentaries and responses are clearly identified and linked to the original article. Publication of criticism does not itself establish an error or misconduct; concerns requiring correction or retraction follow the procedures above.
EHJ seeks to promote rigorous international scholarship through:
• transparency;
• editorial independence;
• responsible peer review;
• methodological rigor;
• philological accuracy;
• scholarly integrity;
• respectful academic dialogue.
Publication ethics are regarded as an ongoing responsibility, and EHJ will continue refining its policies in accordance with internationally recognized standards of scholarly publishing.
Policy updated: 12 October 2026.
The European Hebrew Journal applies double-blind review to research articles, review articles, and short communications, with at least two independent reviewers. Reviewers are normally external specialists. A qualified editor or Board member may review a highly specialised topic under the independence and conflict-of-interest safeguards in the Peer Review Policy.
The Editor-in-Chief may assign two Academic Editors when additional editorial expertise is needed. An Academic Editor handling or deciding a manuscript does not act as its formal reviewer. Reviewer identities remain confidential under the double-blind policy.
Editorial forewords and book reviews receive quality control appropriate to their type. Authors do not handle their own manuscripts, and a non-conflicted editor makes decisions where recusal is required.
European Hebrew Journal (EHJ) ISSN 3122-8879 (online), COBISS.SR-ID 195306505, 1602082250
An international peer-reviewed open access journal dedicated to Hebrew language, Jewish studies, philology, theology, manuscript studies, history, linguistics, and interdisciplinary research related to Jewish cultures and traditions.
Publisher:
Institute for Hebrew Language and Literature
Registered publisher and organisational unit of the Center for Hebrew Language and Literature (legal entity)
Nušićeva 12a, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia
https://hebrew.edu.rs/
Editorial Office:
office@hebrew.edu.rs
Website:
ehj.hebrew.edu.rs
Journal Manager:
Željko Stanojević
ORCID: 0009-0009-0717-6184
ISSN: 3122-8879 online
All articles are published under an open access policy.
