In cases which have not been included in these Rules of Publication Ethics, the Editorial Team uses adequate schemes of conduct prepared by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
The standards presented below refer to the ethical rules binding on the Authors, Editors, Reviewers and Scientific Council at each stage of the texts’ publication in the journal.
All articles sent for publication in the journal are reviewed in terms of their compliance with the ethics rules, integrity, transparency, value and scientific usability.
The editorial team continuously monitors adherence to standards and ethical principles related to the publication of scientific texts and counteracts practices inconsistent with accepted standards.
Texts sent for publication are evaluated by the Editorial Team, taking into consideration, first and foremost, their factual knowledge as well as formal and technical components. The decisions of the Editorial Team must be based on scientific values, and such issues as race, gender, faith, ethnic origin, nationality or political beliefs of the Authors must not, in any way, affect the evaluation of the article.
The Editorial Team decides which materials are going to be published, and which are not. While taking the decision, the following criteria are of the utmost importance: the scientific value of work, originality of formulating the problem, clarity and compliance with the journal’s thematic remit, compliance with the ethics rules, compliance with guidelines regarding factual knowledge and formal components as described in the Guidelines for Authors and points indicated by the Reviewer in the process of peer review.
The journal's Editorial Team is bound to inform the Author(s) about the evaluation mark the sent text received in a peer review.
The Editorial Team Members abide by the confidentiality rule. Therefore, they do not share any information regarding the texts sent for publication with unauthorised persons. The only authorised persons who may obtain such information are the Authors themselves, selected Reviewers, authorised Editors and Scientific Council Members and Publisher.
Unpublished articles cannot be used by the Editorial Team Members or any other persons partaking in the publishing procedures unless written consent of the Authors is provided.
Appointing the Reviewer, the Editorial Team must observe the counteracting conflicts of interest rule.
In the case of the Reviewer, the conflict of interest may arise in circumstances when there are doubts regarding her or his impartiality or may affect her or his actions in the review process, e.g., business, financial, law affiliations, Reviewer’s opinions, scientific competition, and family ties.
If Editorial Team or Scientific Council Member sends a text for the journal, the Editorial Team devotes maximal effort to remain impartial in the process of editing and reviewing. Another Editor of the journal takes the responsibility of these processes, and the person who sends the text is excluded from these processes.
The Editorial Team informs the Reader about the sources of the publication's financing and institutional support or on the part of the organisations and other persons or subjects (financial disclosure) in the published research.
If any complaints or appeals are lodged, the journal’s Editorial Team is bound to register and archive them. The Editorial Team asks for describing the case in detail in the application form and indicating what kind of content or actions this application pertains to. The Editorial Team is obliged to maintain the anonymity of the personal data of the person lodging a complaint or an appeal unless this person expresses a desire to disclose her or his personal information independently. Persons authorised for possessing this information are: the Applicant, authorised Reviewers and Publisher. The Editorial Team is obliged to provide a reply in written form to the complaints and appeals lodged to the Editorial Team within a deadline not exceeding 30 days from the date when this document has been filed. The reply of the Editorial Team must include at least the evaluation of the case and a description of actions which the Editorial Team has undertaken or plans to undertake because of the case.
All the indications of scientific misconduct are unacceptable.
The journal’s Editorial Team is bound to register and archive such cases.
The Editorial Team makes a request to provide them with information in case of detecting scientific misconduct. After receiving a notification, the Editorial Team contacts the Author, and requests an explanation, collects and reviews the gathered and provided proof for scientific misconduct and then proclaims a decision to remove, place a disclaimer/amendment, and inform the bodies or institutions responsible.
The Editorial Team, Author(s) and Reviewers at the stage of the editing process (preceding the text publication) may hold a discussion resulting in proofreading the texts.
The Author may demand that the Editorial Team introduce the corrections required by her or him into the text.
The Editorial Team reserves the right to proofread the texts after they have been published without informing the Readers and Authors. It applies solely to what is referred to as minor changes. Minor changes include, e.g., formatting and spelling corrections. These are not significant corrections which influence the reception of the scope of the content presented.
Significant changessuch as removal of the article due to an error, adding or removing the Author, and correction of data influencing the interpretation of research results after the publication may be implemented in line with the procedures outlined in COPE.
The Editorial Team may consider text removal if:
The notification about text removal must be presumed to be equivalent to article removal. Such a notification should contain the information about the person (the headline should include at least the title(s) and the work Author’s surname(s)) and reasons upon which the text has been removed (in order to distinguish between unintentional errors and purposeful malpractices). The removed texts are not deleted from the printed version of the journal, however, the very fact and reason for the removal shall be indicated in a clear manner. It does not apply to a situation in which the legitimate interest of the Author, Editorial Team, Publisher or third parties would be breached, as in such cases the text may be removed, and the Editorial Team is bound to publish an explanatory notice. The Author has a right to lodge an appeal against the Editorial Team's decision.
In cases which have not been described in these Rules of Publication Ethics, the Editorial Team abides by the guidelines outlined in COPE Retraction Guidelines and COPE Flowcharts.
Authorship may relate to persons or groups who produce the idea or work on the publication popularising intellectual or creative work.
All persons named in the sent work as Authors must play an actual, significant part in the creation of the text (project, idea, planning, performance, results interpretation). Moreover, all persons, who had an impact on the final shape of the work should be named as Co-Authors. The Author who sends the text for publication has an obligation to make sure that persons having contributed to the creation of the article accept its final form.
The remaining persons to whom this condition of Authorship does not apply and whose contribution to text creation was insignificant (e.g., general mentoring, research coordination, data collection) may consent to be listed in the Acknowledgement section.
The order of Authors must be agreed upon and accepted by all the Authors of the text.
The change of authorship or the order in unpublished texts requires the consent of all the text's Authors, Reviewers and Editor in Chief as well as providing an explanation for such changes.
The Editorial Team requires the Authors to issue statements, in particular, declarations regarding the type and scope of respective Authors’ contribution to the creation of work along with their data (name, surname, affiliation, ORCID).
If the Author suspects that the fair play rule has been breached, she or he may lodge a complaint to the Editor in Chief of the journal. For more on this subject, please see the part: Rules for Editorial Team Members. Decisions Regarding Publication and Complaints and Appeals).
Authors of the texts sent for publication are obliged to describe the performed scientific research in a diligent way and interpret the results impartially. The works should contain as much information as possible to enable the identification of the sources of data and research repetition. Presentation and interpretation of data and research results which are inaccurate and inconsistent with the ethics rules are unacceptable and may result in text removal.
Texts violating the rules of scholarly integrity shall not be accepted for publication.
In a case when misconduct has been notified/noticed after the text has been published, the Editorial Team takes actions as described in Part I: Rules for Editorial Team Members: 7. I. Scholarly Integrity Rule and the obligation to respond to its violations.
The Authors of the sent works are always obliged to indicate publications and other sources which have been used by them during the creation of the article.
Authors can send only their own, original texts for publication. These texts cannot be simultaneously sent to another journal/publication nor constitute a part of a journal/publication which has already been published.
Only in exceptional and justified cases may the Editor in Chief give consent for another publication of a text which has been published previously. The text must contain a bibliographic reference to the text published initially.
Authors, using the research or referring to data or words of other persons should use appropriate markers indicating citations. Plagiarism and data fabrication are unacceptable.
Unpublished articles cannot be used by the Editorial Team Members or any other persons participating in the publishing procedures without the written consent of the Authors.
Authors may be asked to present unprocessed research results, therefore, they should be prepared to provide access to these data.
If the Author detects significant errors or inaccuracies in her or his text, she or he is obliged to notify the journal's Editorial Team of this fact immediately in order to remove the text, prepare errata or correct the existing errors.
The Author, expressing a will to publish the article, declares, at the same time, that she or he will meet the obligation to respond to the Editorial Team's summons to provide explanations to possible complaints, appeals or charges of scientific misconduct applying to the published text.
The Author, the Editorial Team and the Reviewers at the stage of the editing process (preceding text publication) may hold a discussion resulting in proofreading the texts. The Author, sending the text for publication, obliges to actively participate in the discussions with the journal’s Editorial Team.
Significant changes such as the removal of the article due to an error, adding or removing the Author, and correction of data influencing the interpretation of research results after the publication may be implemented in line with the procedures outlined in COPE.
The Author has the right to remove the text sent to the Editorial Team in case of gross negligence of the Editorial Team during the editing process. In case of serious delays in the editing process, the Authors should be notified of the reason for the delay. The Editorial Team should pass the information of the maximum time of the article proceeding to the Author. Complaints about the Editorial Team's negligence and requests to remove the article should be addressed directly to the Editor in Chief.
The Author sending the text for publication must declare that the article is original, does not breach the rights or personal goods of third parties and that she or he obtained consent from the persons whose images or words, visual or photographic works have been recorded/used in the work, for their use in the text and sharing on the Internet.
Reviewers are obligated to adhere to the accepted Reviewing Guidelines of the journal.
All reviewed works are confidential, which means that disclosing them to third parties is unacceptable (except for authorised persons).
Reviews should be objective. Personal criticism of Authors’ works is considered inappropriate. All observations of a Reviewer should be justified adequately.
The Reviewers are committed to meeting the highest standards and ethics rules regarding the publication of scientific text and preventing practices that counteract the established standards. In order to do that they may enter adequate corrections, and also, in the case of suspicion of dishonest practices (plagiarism, falsifying research results etc.) or unethical actions, take a decision not to publish the text.
The Reviewers, if need be, should cite reference works not included by the Author. Any significant similarities to other works should also be indicated and the Editorial Team should be notified about them.
Issues such as race, gender, faith, origin, nationality or political beliefs of the Authors must not, in any way, affect the result of the review Texts sent for publication are evaluated first and foremost in terms of their factual knowledge as well as formal and technical components. Decisions of the Reviewers must be based upon scientific values.
The Reviewer must not use the reviewed works for her or his personal needs and merits. They cannot evaluate texts in whose case there may be a conflict of interest with its Author/Authors.
In the case of the Reviewer a conflict of interest may arise in circumstances where there are any doubts regarding her or his impartiality or her or his actions may be in any way influenced during the reviewing process, e.g., business, financial, legal affiliations; Reviewer’s opinions, scientific competition, and family relations.
The Reviewers are obliged to provide the review by a set deadline. If for some reason (factual knowledge, lack of time) they are unable to meet the deadline or review the article, they should immediately inform the Editorial Team of this fact.
In cases which have not been described in these Rules of Publication Ethics, the Editorial Team abides by the guidelines outlined in COPE Retraction Guidelines and COPE Flowcharts.