Przegląd Zachodniopomorski

ISSN: 0552-4245     eISSN: 2353-3021    OAI    DOI: 10.18276/pz
CC BY-SA   Open Access   DOAJ  CEEOL  ERIH PLUS

Ethics

The scientific journal „Przegląd Zachodniopomorski” publishes only original works, being a result of individual research and not published earlier elsewhere, or being revised/completed versions of articles previously published. If other persons participated in creating the content of the publication, the authors are obliged to reveal their names and affiliations. The authors must have the right to dispose of the content of their article.

All the articles submitted for publication in “Przegląd Zachodniopomorski” are evaluated for their authenticity and compliance with ethical requirements. The Editorial Staff are committed to maintain the highest standards of editorial ethics and to undertake every effort to prevent unfair editorial practices. If the editors find or are informed about any unfair practices of an author of an article, they are obliged to document them and inform proper institutions.

Ghostwriting: The Editorial Staff of “Przegląd Zachodniopomorski” cares about the reliability of the published articles. All documented cases of articles written by third parties are regarded as unreliable and are unacceptable. Proper scientific institutions will be informed about such cases.

Actions undertaken in cases of unreliable publishing practices are based on the COPE directives.

 

PRINCIPLES OF OPERATING OF THE EDITORIAL STAFF

Editorial decisions: The Editorial Staff is a team consisting of historians specializing in various historic periods and various fields of history. The proper editor, representing a selected period and/or problem, makes a decision whether  the submitted article can be accepted for publication. The decision of rejecting an article or accepting it for further editorial processing is based on its significance, quality, and fit with the scope of the journal. However, the final decision of accepting the article is dependent on the positive opinions of two independent anonymous reviewers, who do not know the author’s name (double blind  review process). The editor attempts to select reviewers whose field of research corresponds with the topic of the article. In case of negative opinion the Editorial Staff takes advice of the selected members of the Scientific Council of the journal (according to their field  of research and the topic of the article) and makes decision to accept the article, appoint additional reviewer or reject the article, and informs the author of their decision.

Transparency of the editorial process: The whole editorial process is transparent  and is carried out with the Author’s Electronic Support System of the Szczecin University Press. After the article is received in the e-mail inbox of “Przegląd Zachodniopomorski” the Editorial Staff makes decision as to further proceeding, and the author is informed of the subsequent stages of the editorial process, i.e. of accepting  or rejecting the article, receiving the review, of a need to implement corrections suggested in the review and after the language editing, and finally of sending the article to print. Articles in successive issues of the journal are published primarily in paper version of which the author receives one contributor’s copy. Then all the articles from a volume are published in electronic form on the website of “Przegląd Zachodniopomorski” and are made available in electronic databases in which the journal is indexed.

Ethical standards:  The Editorial Staff monitors ethical standards of the scientific publications and uses every possible means against any form of editorial malpractice.

Confidentiality: The Editorial Staff must ensure that all the submitted materials remain confidential during the editorial processing. No information concerning the submitted manuscript can be revealed to anyone except the authors themselves, the reviewers and the possible reviewers, the Scientific Council of the journal, and the Publisher. Unpublished materials cannot be used by the editors and the members of the Scientific Council for their own research without written consent of the authors.

Maintaining the integrity of the academic record: The editors must protect the integrity of the published academic record and, when necessary, implement corrections and announce revocations in cases of alleged improper conduct of research and publications. Plagiarism and deceitful data are unacceptable.

Withdrawal of the articles: The editors of the journal will consider withdrawal of a publication if the article has been published elsewhere without suitable information from the author or is a plagiarism. While the articles already published will not be deleted neither form the paper version of the journal nor from the electronic archives, their status will be properly marked.

 

OBLIGATORY PRINCIPLES FOR AUTHORS

Originality and plagiarism: Authors should make sure they have written completely original works, and if they used someone else’s work and/or words, these should be marked as quotation or paraphrase and the source of the origin should be indicated in a footnote and in the references. Plagiarism and deceitful data are unacceptable.

Indicating sources: Sources of works used in the article, both quoted directly and paraphrased, should always be indicated. The sources should be also included in the references.

Multiple or parallel publication: Authors shouldn’t publish the same manuscript in more than one journal. Submitting the same text to more than one journal is an unethical publishing practice and is unacceptable. In exceptional cases – justified by the unavailability o the article or different language of its publication – it can be published provided the consent of the former editor/publisher is obtained and the proper annotation is put at the beginning of the article.

Errors in published works: Prior to publishing, the article undergoes multiple checks, first by the proper editor, then by two anonymous reviewers, by a language lector, and by the language editor. The author should consider all the remarks and suggested language corrections, and implement them in the article. After typesetting, the author has still the opportunity to proofread the galleys. If he/she discovers any errors or inaccuracies in his/her article, he/she is obliged to let know the Editorial Staff immediately. If the author refuses to implement the corrections without reasonable justification, his/her article can be finally rejected.

 

OBLIGATORY PRINCIPLES FOR REVIEWERS

Participation in the editorial decisions: The evaluation by the independent reviewers helps the editor to make a decision of accepting or rejecting the article, but it also should help the authors to improve their manuscript. If the reviewer offers critical remarks on the evaluated manuscript, he/she should state whether he/she deems the article publishable despite these remarks, and if so, provide advices as to how the article should be improved or completed. The reviewer can then demand the improved manuscript for further inspection or, if the remarks are of less substantive significance, leave the evaluation to the discretion of the editors.

Scientific competence and deadlines: If a reviewer asked to evaluate an anonymous manuscript feels incompetent to evaluate its content or knows he/she cannot keep to the deadline, he/she should inform the editor about these circumstances and possibly withdraw from accepting the text for evaluation.

Confidentiality: The whole manuscript, which the reviewer receives for evaluation, must be regarded as a confidential document and cannot be used for personal profit. It cannot be shown to or discussed with outsiders except for those authorized by the Editorial Staff.

Identification of sources. The reviewers should identify suitable published works which weren’t listed by the authors. Every significant similarity or overlapping of the evaluated manuscript and whatever other published document should be reported to the Editorial Staff.

Objectivity standards: The opinion should be possibly objective, clearly stated, and justified with relevant arguments. Scientific articles are reviewed confidentially and anonymously (double-blind review process). The reviewers and the authors must be from different scientific centers, but if the reviewer knows the author’s identity and is convinced that a conflict of interests occurs, he/she should inform the Editorial Staff about it. Reviewers are obliged to reveal conflicts of interests, particularly concerning:

direct personal relationship (kinship, legal relationships),

a relationship of occupational subordination,

direct scientific cooperation over the past two years prior to giving the review.

To this end, reviewers are requested to fulfill and sign the Reviewer’s Declaration accessible together with the Reviewer’s Form.

Transparency of the reviewing procedure: The current list of all reviewers is published on the journal’s website, the names of reviewers of particular publications are not being revealed. Principles of evaluation of the articles and the Reviewer’s Form are made publicly known on the website of the journal “Przegląd Zachodniopomorski” under the bookmark “Reviewing”. The reviews have a written form and are the basis for accepting the article for publication or rejecting it. Indisputable cases the final decision to accept the article for publication is made by the editors together with the proper members of the Scientific Council.

 

PRINCIPLES OF OPERATING OF THE SCIENTIFIC COUNCIL

Members: Members of the Scientific Council of the journal “Przegląd Zachodniopomorski” are renowned scientists from various centers in different countries, authorities in the subject areas covered by the journal’s scope.

Function: The Scientific Council of the journal “Przegląd Zachodniopomorski” is an advisory body of the Editorial Staff, offering support in various areas of the journal’s functioning, its further development, as well as better promotion of the journal among the Polish and foreign scientists. The Scientific Council also helps the editors to accept for publication or reject articles that received mutually exclusive opinions of the reviewers. In such cases, the editors seek the opinion of the selected members of the Scientific Council whose field of research is the same or similar to the topic of the article.

Confidentiality: Members of the Scientific Council of the journal “Przegląd Zachodniopomorski” are not allowed to disclose any information concerning the authors, manuscripts, and reviews to anyone except the editors and the Publisher. Unpublished materials cannot be used by them in their own research without written permission from the authors.

 

Committee of Publication Ethics (COPE)