Publication ethics

The Editorial Board of Studia Europaea Gnesnensia attach great importance to observing ethical principles and good publication practice stated in:

- Code of Ethics for Scholars, 3rd Edition. Warsaw 2020.

- Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors,

- COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers,

- Dobre praktyki w procedurach recenzyjnych [Good Practice in Reviewing Procedures], Warsaw 2011.

The above are binding on:

- the Editors,

- the authors,

- the reviewers.

Responsibilities of the Editors

1. Ensure that good publication practice are followed.
2. Prevent dishonest practices, thoroughly analysing each case, giving the author/authors the opportunity to respond to allegations.
3. Maintain confidentiality. No disclosure of author’s data to reviewers and vice versa is possible. Reviews are double-blind.
4. Evaluate and determine whether a text meets the standards of a scientific work, whether it is correctly structured in terms of methodology, whether it relies on a critical apparatus.
5. Assessment of compatibility of the submitted text with the profile of the journal.
6. Adherence to the principles of impartiality and objectivity.
7. Cooperation with the Scientific Council of the journal in the reviewer appointment procedure.
8. When selecting a reviewer, take into account the relation of their research interests to the subject matter of the submitted text and their knowledge of languages (with publications in a language other than Polish). In accordance with the principle adopted to meet the requirements of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education, the Editorial Board appoint reviewers engaged at a different university or research centre than the one with which the prospective author is affiliated. With texts in a foreign language, the rule is that the reviewer should be affiliated with an institution located outside the author's country.
9. When selecting reviewers, the Editorial Board examine possible conflict of interest between reviewers and the author (direct personal relations, relations of professional subordination, etc.).
10. Notify the author whether their submission has been approved for publication or rejected.
11. Responsibility for the final form of the published volume.

Responsibilities of the author

1. The author is expected to submit a text which are has not been published before, has not been submitted to the Editorial Board of another journal, does not infringe any third party copyrights, nor constitute plagiarism or self-plagiarism.

Each submitted text is verified by reviewers as well as using anti-plagiarism software. Should any fraudulent practice be suspected, the Secretary shall initiate an investigation with the participation of reviewers and the author of the text, as well as advise the Editor-in-Chief. If the suspicion is confirmed, the Editor-in-Chief shall decide to reject the text immediately and notify the author of the text of the fact.

2. Adaptation of the proposed text to the editorial requirements of the journal.
3. Accurate and truthful statement of authorship or co-authorship of the work. Failure to disclose the name of one of the co-authors, or stating authorship by a person who has not contributed to the text (or whose contribution is negligible) is unacceptable and constitutes grave malpractice.

In cases where an article has more than one author, contribution percentage must be provided for each of the authors.

4. The author is solely responsible for the content and language of the text.

The author/author is obliged to verify the correctness and accuracy of all citations contained in their text and in the bibliography.

5. The rules applicable to citations must be observed: “tiered” citations must be avoided, implicit and selective citations are prohibited, self-citations needs to be approached with great caution.
6. The Editorial Board must be advised of potential conflicts of interest at the time of submission.
7. The Editorial Board must be notified about errors in the submitted text as soon as they are discovered.
8. The opinions of the reviewer(s) must be acknowledged and taken into account, including potential polemics conducted through the Secretary of the Editorial Board (the identity and personal details of the reviewer(s) and author(s) are not disclosed to either party).
9. Deadlines must be observed—in the case of changes or amendments to the text and approval of the final version of the text following proofreading.
10. Consent must be given for the manuscript to be published in paper and electronic versions as well as for uploading the PDF version to the journal website and all the databases and scientific repositories cooperating with the journal.

Obligations of the reviewers

1. Objective and impartial assessment of the text in terms of its content and quality.
2. Verification of the originality of the text and detection of possible fraudulent publication practices.
3. Reviewers must promptly inform the Editorial Board of their reservations or detected conflicts of interest.
4. Participation in the investigation of suspected unfair publication practices.
5. Proper completion of the review form, awarding points on a scale of 0-25 (only texts which receive two positive reviews, i.e. awarding at least 18 points each, are published) and a lucid conclusion.
6. Remarks concerning the text in the form of comments are welcome.
7. Use of appropriate style and tone in opinions, suggestions and comments. Only substantive arguments are acceptable.
8. Timely return of the review form.
9. Maintaining confidentiality: the text received for review must not be shown or made available to third parties.
10. Reviewers must consent to having their name listed in the alphabetical list of reviewers on the journal's website (once a year).

Ghostwriting occurs when a person has made a substantial contribution to a publication, but they have not been named as co-author or their role has not been stated in the acknowledgements accompanying the publication.

Guest authorship (honorary authorship) denotes the situation where the contribution of an author is negligible or non-existent but they are still listed as an author/co-author of the publication.

References to works which do not provide the cited data but merely another reference to a study where they are included.