“Defence Strategic Communications” is an annual, open access, peer-reviewed and refereed journal published by the NATO StratCom COE, Riga, Latvia. The Editorial Board of “Defence Strategic Communications” is headed by Dr Neville Bolt (King's College London). Managing editor of the journal is Linda Curika, copy-editor of the journal is Anna Reynolds.
Journal DOI number is 10.3966/2018.RIGA.
Journal ISSN number is 2500-9478.
Articles published in “Defence Strategic Communications” benefit from our editorial, production, and marketing expertise, and are permanently available online immediately on publication to anyone, anywhere, at any time. Publishing in the “Defence Strategic Communications” benefits from high exposure at a NATO-affiliated peer reviews open access journal, expert editorial board, rapid online publication, support in marketing the article, rigorous peer review, creative commons licensing options, and article metrics. We provide green open access - articles are made freely accessible for everyone. The copyright for these articles sits with the NATO Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence.
Publishing schedule. The journal is published bi-annually. Issues are published in autumn/winter and spring/summer period. New issues are made available online in December and June.
Archiving: The journal is electronically archived within the system of the National Library of Latvia.
Revenue sources: The journal is funded by the sponsoring nations of the NATO Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence.
Advertising: The journal does not offer advertising opportunities.
Direct marketing: The journal does not support any direct marketing activities.
One of the principal aims of the NATO StratCom COE is to undertake research and analysis, and in order to enhance this work, the COE decided to initiate an academic journal “Defence Strategic Communications”. Our hope is that the journal will serve as an academic forum where scholars and practitioners will be able to share knowledge and ideas about Strategic Communications specifically from the defence perspective. “Defence Strategic Communications” publishes original papers, review papers, conceptual framework, analytical and simulation models, case studies, empirical research, technical notes and book reviews.
“Defence Strategic Communications” publishes original papers, review papers, conceptual framework, analytical and simulation models, case studies, empirical research, technical notes and book reviews. The Journal welcomes two kinds of contributions: full-length analytical articles ranging between 8000-10000 words, and commentaries/book review essays between 3000–5000 words. Authors are requested to submit their papers in an electronic/soft format to the following email address: firstname.lastname@example.org.
Professor Nancy Snow
Kyoto University of Foreign Studies, Pax Mundi Professor of Public Diplomacy. Adjunct Fellow, Institute of Contemporary Asian Studies, Temple University Japan. California State University, Fullerton Professor of Communications, Emeritus.
Professor Nicholas O'Shaughnessy
Professor of communications and of post-Cold War German history at Queen Mary, University of London.
Professor Mervyn Frost
Professor of International Relations, King's College London.
Professor Žaneta Ozoliņa
Head of Department of Political Science, Director of Advanced Institute of Social and Political Research, University of Latvia.
Professor Malik Dahlan
Professor of International Law and Public Policy, Queen Mary University of London, Senior Mediation Fellow in residence, Davis Center Negotiation Task Force
Dr. Ksenia Kirkham
Teaching Associate at King's College London.
Dr. Nerijus Maliukevicius
Lecturer and researcher at the Institute of International Relations and Political Science, Vilnius University.
Dr. Vinicius Mariano de Carvalho, SFHEA
Lecturer at the King's Brazil Institute and War Studies.
Dr Vera Michlin-Shapir
Dr. Domitilla Sagramoso
Lecturer at Department of War Studies, King’s College London.
Dr. Tiko Tsomaia
Professor of journalism and communication at the Georgian Institute of Public Affairs in Tbilisi
Mr. James Farwell
Associate Fellow at King's Centre for Strategic Communications
Peer review policy. “Defence Strategic Communications" adheres to a rigorous double-blind reviewing policy in which the identity of both the reviewer and author are always concealed from both parties. All articles meeting the editorial requirements and standards of the DSC are submitted for external double blind refereeing.
Journal policies on authorship and contributorship. All parties who have made a substantive contribution to the article should be listed as authors. Principal authorship, authorship order, and other publication credits should be based on the relative scientific or professional contributions of the individuals involved, regardless of their status. A student is usually listed as principal author on any multiple-authored publication that substantially derives from the student’s dissertation or thesis. Defence Strategic Communications expects all published articles to contain clear and accurate attribution of authorship. It is the responsibility of the author to ensure that all authors that contributed to the work are fairly acknowledged and that the published author list accurately reflects individual contributions. Where authorship disputes arise, we encourage authors and editors to follow the COPE guidelines detailed here. Defence Strategic Communications supports the ICMJE definitions of authorship as published here.
Acknowledgements. All contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be listed in an Acknowledgements section. Examples of those who might be acknowledged include a person who provided purely technical help, or a department chair who provided only general support. "Defence Strategic Communications" encourages authors to include a declaration of any conflicting interests.
Publication ethics. The NATO Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence is committed to upholding the integrity of the academic record. We encourage authors to refer to the Committee on Publication Ethics’ International Standards for Authors. NATO Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics and to supporting ethical research practices. Journal editors follow the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors and reviewers follow the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. Allegations of misconduct will be investigated in accordance with the COPE Best Practice Guidelines as far as is practicable.
Plagiarism. NATO Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence and Defence strategic Communications take issues of copyright infringement, plagiarism or other breaches of best practice in publication very seriously. We seek to protect the rights of our authors and we always investigate claims of plagiarism or misuse of published articles. Equally, we seek to protect the reputation of the journal against malpractice. Submitted articles may be checked with duplication-checking software. Where an article, for example, is found to have plagiarised other work or included third-party copyright material without permission or with insufficient acknowledgement, or where the authorship of the article is contested, we reserve the right to take action including, but not limited to: publishing an erratum or corrigendum (correction); retracting the article; taking up the matter with the head of department or dean of the author's institution and/or relevant academic bodies or societies; or taking appropriate legal action.
Prior publication. If material has been previously published it is not acceptable for publication in Defence Strategic Communications.
Authors fees. There are not author fees to publish in the journal.
After your article has been published in the journal, you will receive information with article’s DOI number, website links to the journal issue and the article itself, as well as a separate pdf file for your use. You are free to share article’s Version of Record (VoR - the version of a journal article that has been published) as much as you like, including via social media, on a scholarly collaboration network, your own personal website, or on a preprint server intended for non-commercial use (for example arXiv, bioRxiv, SocArXiv, etc.). If you wish to repubish the article in print, you have to get in touch with the managing editor of the journal (email@example.com). If you do decide to post your VoR anywhere, we ask for adding the following text:
“This is an original manuscript / preprint of an article published by the NATO Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence in “Defence Strategic Communications" on [date of publication], available online: http://www.stratcomcoe.org/[full link].”
Defence Strategic Communications is committed to transparency in areas of potential conflict of interest.
Conflict of interest exists when an author’s private interests might be seen as influencing the objectivity of research or experiment, to the point that a reasonable observer might wonder if the individual’s behaviour or judgement was motivated by considerations of his or her competing interests. It is the responsibility of a manuscript’s corresponding author to confirm if co-authors hold any conflict of interest. The corresponding author may be required to co-ordinate completion of written forms from each co-author and submit these to the editor or journal administrator prior to acceptance. The following should also be declared, either through the Acknowledgements section of the manuscript or at the point of submission:
- All sources of research funding, including direct and indirect financial support, supply of equipment, or materials (including specialist statistical or writing assistance).
- The role of the research funder(s) or sponsor(s), if any, in the research design, execution, analysis, interpretation, and reporting.
- Any relevant financial and non-financial interests and relationships that might be considered likely to affect the interpretation of their findings or that editors, reviewers, or readers might reasonably wish to know. These might include, but are not limited to, patent or stock ownership, membership on a company’s board of directors, membership of an advisory board or committee for a company, consultancy for a company, or receipt of speaker’s fees from a company.
When considering whether to declare a conflicting interest or connection we encourage authors to consider how they would answer the following question: Is there any arrangement that would embarrass you or any of your co-authors if it was to emerge after publication and you had not declared it?
Defence Strategic Communications expects its journal editors and peer reviewers to declare competing interests at the point of agreeing their position and update them annually. Editors and peer reviewers are required to recuse themselves from individual manuscripts if they themselves have a potential conflict of interest.
"Defence Startegic Communications" follows the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines on appeals to journal editor decisions and complaints about a journal’s editorial management of the peer review process. We welcome genuine appeals to editor decisions. However, you will need to provide strong evidence or new data/information in response to the editor’s and reviewers’ comments. Editors don’t expect frequent appeals and they rarely reverse their original decisions. Therefore, if you receive a decision to reject your manuscript, you are strongly advised to submit to another journal. The decision to reject a manuscript for publication will often involve the editor’s judgment of priority/ importance. These are things which authors usually cannot address through an appeal. However, if you believe that there is a case to be made for a genuine appeal please follow the instructions below.
If you wish to appeal a journal editor’s decision, please submit an appeal letter to the journal’s online editorial office. Please address this to the managing editor (firstname.lastname@example.org) and explain clearly the basis for an appeal. You should: detail why you disagree with the decision, provide specific responses to any of the editor’s and/or reviewers’ comments that contributed to the reject decision, provide any new information or data that you would like the journal to take into consideration, provide evidence if you believe a reviewer has made technical errors in their assessment of your manuscript and, if possible - include evidence if you believe a reviewer may have a conflict of interest. After receiving the appeal, we may involve any editors who handled the peer review of the original submission. Editors may confirm their decision to reject the manuscript, invite a revised manuscript, or seek additional peer- or statistical review of the original manuscript. Editors will consider one appeal per article and all decisions on appeals are final. The timely review and decision-making process for new submissions will take precedence over appeals.