Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

All journals published by the Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology, Polish Academy of Sciences are peer reviewed. The journal Fasciculi Archaeologiae Historicae is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics based on the principles developed by the international organisation COPE, as well as the principles of the Code of Ethics for Researchers developed by the Research Ethics Committee at the Polish Academy of Sciences (Komisja ds. etyki w nauce).

Our mission is to provide the readers and authors with journals of highest quality and therefore we state the following principles of Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement. In any case of malpractice discovered, articles will remain unpublished or will be retracted (even if already published). In accordance with the code of conduct we will report any cases of suspected plagiarism or duplicate publishing. 

The following are the standards of ethical conduct applicable to all parties involved in the editorial process of the journal: the publisher, the editor and members of the editorial committee, authors and reviewers:


§1. In the case of unethical publishing behaviour (alleged or proven scientific error, duplicate publication or plagiarism), the publisher, in close cooperation with the editorial office, reserves the right to take all appropriate steps to clarify the situation and make corrections to the article in question. This will involve the prompt publication of an erratum, a clarification or, in extreme cases, removal of the work in question.

§2. The publisher, together with the editors, will take appropriate action to identify and avoid publication of articles based on scientific misconduct, and will neither encourage nor knowingly allow such acts to occur.


§1. Monitoring of ethical standards:  The editors and members of the editorial committee monitor the ethical standards of scientific publications and take all possible measures against any publication malpractice.

§2. Fair play and editorial freedom: Submitted texts are judged on their scientific merit (originality, factual content, clarity of argument) and their relevance to the journal, without regard to the author's race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, religious beliefs, citizenship, political views or institutional affiliation. A decision about the publication is not influenced by government policy or by any institution other than the journal itself. The editor-in-chief has full decision-making power over the entire content of the journal and the timing of article publication.

§3. Decisions concerning publication: The final responsibility on what to publish rests on the editor. The decision to accept or reject an article submitted for publication is based on its originality, merit, clarity and relevance to the theme of the journal. The editorial board provides an honest, double-blind review for articles proposed for publication. The aim is to avoid potential conflicts of interest between the author and members of the editorial board and reviewers.

§4. Confidentiality principle: The editor and members of the editorial board will ensure that all material submitted to the journal remains confidential while under review. They will not disclose any information about the submitted manuscript to anyone except the authors, reviewers, potential reviewers or other editorial advisors and the publisher.

§5. Disclosure of a potential conflict of interest: Unpublished material in a submitted manuscript may not be used by members of the editorial board and editorial committee in their own research without express prior written permission of the original authors. The editors will decline to consider papers where a conflict of interest arises e.g. from competition, collaboration or other relationships with any of the authors, companies or institutions associated with the publications; instead they will ask another member of the editorial board to handle the manuscript.

§6. Maintaining the integrity of the scientific records: The editors will safeguard the exclusivity of published scientific output, making corrections and references where necessary, and prosecuting suspected or alleged malpractice in research and publication. Plagiarism or falsification of data will not be allowed. Accordingly, the editors are always ready to publish necessary corrections, clarifications, references and apologies.

§7. Publication decisions: The editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts considered for publication will be reviewed by at least two reviewers who are experts in the field. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal will be published based on an assessment of the quality of the manuscript, its significance, reviewers' comments and relevant legal requirements. In making the final decision, the Editor-in-Chief may confer with other editors (the editor of a special issue volume) or reviewers.

§8. Act of unethical conduct:  Every reported act of unethical editorial behaviour will be investigated, even if it is discovered many years after publication. Editors follow the COPE schemes when dealing with cases of suspected misconduct. If the ethical concerns are found to be substantiated during the course of the investigation, the necessary correction, justification or explanation will be published in the journal.

§9. The editors will consider retracting a manuscript if:
- there is clear evidence that the results reported are unreliable, either as a result of malpractice (e.g. by fabricating data) or errors (e.g. miscalculation or experimental error);
- findings have been previously published elsewhere without proper reference, permission or justification (cases of duplicate publications).
The retraction note will clearly state which article is concerned and who is retracting it. Reasons will be provided to distinguish fair practice from improper conduct. Retracted articles will not be removed from printed copies of the journal or from the electronic archives, but their status as retracted will be clearly indicated.


§1. All authors must ensure that their work is original.

§2. All authors must ensure that the manuscript has not been published elsewhere. Simultaneous submission of an article for publication in more than one venue is a breach of publication ethics.

§3. Any work or words of other authors, co-authors or taken from other sources should be properly marked and cited.

§4. All authors submitting their work for publication in the journal as original articles confirm that the submitted work represents their contribution as authors and has not been copied or taken in whole or in part from other work without an explicit referencing.

§5. All authors should disclose financial or other conflicts of interest that may affect the results or interpretation of their work (financial support of the project should be stated).

§6. If an author discovers a material error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's responsibility to notify the journal editor immediately and to cooperate with the editor in order to correct or remove the article.

§7. Originality and plagiarism:  Authors should ensure that they have prepared original work, and if authors have used the work and/or contributions and conclusions of others, they must be cited. Plagiarism or falsification of data will not be allowed.

§8. Access to and archiving of data: Authors may be asked to provide source data to the editor. They should be prepared to do so and to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication of their article.

§9. Multiple or parallel publications:  Authors should generally not publish text describing the same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

§10.Authorship of the work:  Individuals who made significant contributions to the idea, execution and presentation of the study or interpretation of the presented results should be listed as authors. All those who contributed to the above should be listed as co-authors. The author in charge of correspondence with the journal should confirm that all eligible co-authors have been included in the author list and there is no inappropriate listing of someone as a co-author as well as that all co-authors have read the final version of the paper, accepted it and agreed to its submission for publication.

§11. Conflicts of interest and their disclosure:  Authors should disclose at the earliest possible stage (usually at the time of submission and by attaching a statement to the manuscript) any conflicts of interest that may be considered to affect the results obtained, or their interpretations in the submitted manuscript. Potential conflicts of interest to be disclosed include: financial conflicts, such as honoraria, educational scholarships or other funding, memberships, employment, equity interests, and paid expert testimony or licensing agreements as well as non-financial conflicts arising from competitive or collaborative relationships, or from other relationships with authors, companies and institutions involved in writing the manuscript.


§1. Assistance in the editorial decision:  Double reviews help the editor make decisions about an article and can also help authors improve their manuscript.

§2. Confidentiality: The entire manuscript received for review is treated as a confidential document. It is not shown or discussed with anyone except those authorised by the publisher.

§3. Evaluation standards: Evaluation is performed objectively. Personal criticism of the author is considered inappropriate. Reviewers will clearly express their views supported with pertinent arguments.

§4. Confirmation of sources:  Reviewers will draw the author's attention to relevant published papers that have not been cited by the authors. Any significant similarity or coincidence of the manuscript under consideration with any other published article will be reported to the editor.

§5. Conflicts of interest and their disclosure: Reviewers will not undertake the assessment of papers in the case of a conflict of interest arising from competition, collaboration or other relationships with any of the authors, companies or institutions involved in writing the paper.

§6. Timeliness:  Any reviewer who feels incompetent to evaluate the research presented in a paper or knows that it will not be possible to prepare a review in the allotted time should notify the editor and withdraw from the review process.


The journal Fasciculi Archaeologiae Historicae operates under the principles of free access. No fees are charged for article submission, review or publication. All published articles can be downloaded for free and without login.