Publication ethics and publication malpractice statement
All journals published by the Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology, Polish Academy of Sciences, undergo peer review. Articles submitted for publication are assessed in terms of significant value, originality and ethical principles. Editors and editorial team of the “Przegląd Archeologiczny” (Archaeological Review) journal are committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics based on the principles advocated by the international organization Committee on Publication Ethics (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.
Flowcharts of the adopted COPE procedures.
In order to provide our readers with journals of the highest quality, we state the following principles of publication ethics and malpractice statement. In cases of malpractice, articles will remain unpublished or be retracted (even if already published). According to our code of conduct, we will report any suspected cases of plagiarism or duplicate publishing.
The following ethical standards apply to all parties involved in the editorial process of the journal: the publisher, the editor, members of the editorial committee, authors, and reviewers.
DUTIES OF EDITORS
Monitoring the ethical standards: Editors, Editorial Board, and editorial staff are monitoring the ethical standards of scientific publications and takes all possible measures against any publication malpractices.
Fair play and editorial independence: Submitted manuscripts are evaluated for their academic merit (intellectual content, originality, study’s validity clarity) and its relevance to the journal’s scope, without regard to the author’s race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, religious beliefs, citizenship, political philosophy or institutional affiliation. The decision to edit and publish is not determined by the policies of governments or any other agencies outside of the journal itself. The Editor-in-Chief has full authority over the entire editorial content of the journal and the timing of publication of that content.
Decisions concerning publication: The editor is responsible for deciding which of the submitted articles should or should not be published. The decision to accept or reject a paper for publication is based on its importance, originality, clarity, and its relevance to the scope of the journal. Editors must ensure a fair blind peer-review of the submitted articles for publication. They will strive to prevent any potential conflict of interests between the author and editorial and review personnel.
Confidentiality principle: The editor and the members of the editorial board must ensure that all materials submitted to the journal remain confidential while under review. They must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the authors, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher.
Conflicts of interest and their disclosure: Editors and editorial board members will not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the authors’ explicit written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained by editors as a result of handling the manuscript will be kept confidential and not used for their personal advantage. Editors will recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers; instead, they will ask another member of the editorial board to handle the manuscript.
Maintain the integrity of the academic record: The editors will guard the integrity of the published academic record by issuing corrections and retractions when needed and pursuing suspected or alleged research and publication misconduct. Plagiarism and fraudulent data are not acceptable. The Editorial board always be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies when needed.
Publication decisions: The editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication to undergo peer-review 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 the validation of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, the reviewers’ comments, and such legal requirements as are currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
Involvement and cooperation in investigations: Editors (in conjunction with the publisher and/or society) will take responsive measures when ethical concerns are raised with regard to a submitted manuscript or published paper. Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior will be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication. Editors follow the COPE Flowcharts when dealing with cases of suspected misconduct. If on the investigation, the ethical concern is well-founded, a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note as may be relevant, will be published in the journal.
Editors will consider retracting a publication if:
- they have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g. data fabrication) or honest error (e.g. miscalculation or experimental error);
- the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper cross-referencing, permission, or justification (cases of redundant publication);
- it constitutes plagiarism or reports unethical research.
Notice of the retraction should be linked to the retracted article (by including the title and authors in the retraction heading), clearly identify the retracted article, and state who is retracting the article. Retraction notices should always mention the reason(s) for retraction to distinguish honest errors from misconduct. Retracted articles will not be removed from printed copies of the journal nor from electronic archives but their retracted status will be indicated will be clearly indicated.
DUTIES OF AUTHORS
All authors must ensure that they have written original works. In addition, they must ensure that the manuscript has not been issued elsewhere. Any work or words of other authors, contributors, or sources should be appropriately credited and referenced. Authors submitting their works to the journal for publication as original articles confirm that the submitted works represent their authors' contributions and have not been copied or plagiarized in whole or in part from other works without clearly citing. All authors should disclose financial or other conflict of interest that might influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript (financial support for the project should be disclosed).
Submitting author is required to sign a percentage of author’s work declaration.
If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal editor and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. Submitting a paper simultaneously to more than one publication at a time is a breach of publications ethics.
Reporting standards: Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. The paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. The fabrication of results and making of fraudulent or inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and may cause rejection or retraction of a manuscript or a published article.
Originality and plagiarism: Authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others they need to be cited or quoted. Plagiarism and fraudulent data are not acceptable.
Access to and archiving of data: Authors may be asked to provide the raw data for editorial review, should be prepared to provide public access to such data, and should be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after the publication of their paper.
Multiple or concurrent publication: Authors should not in general publish a manuscript describing essentially the same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Authorship of the manuscript: 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 corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Conflicts of interest and their disclosure: Authors should, at the earliest stage possible (generally by submitting a disclosure form at the time of submission and including a statement in the manuscript), disclose any conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include financial ones such as honoraria, educational grants or other funding, participation in speakers’ bureaus, membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest, and paid expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements, as well as non-financial ones such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs in the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the work should be disclosed (including the grant number or other reference number if any).
Acknowledgement of sources: The proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. The authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the scope of the reported work. Information obtained privately (from a conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties) must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Authors should not use information obtained in the course of providing confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications unless they have obtained the explicit written permission of the author(s) of the work involved in these services.
Peer review: Authors are obliged to participate in the peer-review process and cooperate fully by responding promptly to editors’ requests. In the case of the first decision of "revisions necessary", authors should respond to the reviewers’ comments systematically, point by point, and in a timely manner, revising and re-submitting their manuscript to the journal by the deadline given.
Fundamental errors in published works: When authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, it is their obligation to promptly notify the journal’s editors or publisher and cooperate with them to either correct the paper in the form of an erratum or to retract the paper. If the editors or publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error or inaccuracy, then it is the authors’ obligation to promptly correct or retract the paper or provide evidence to the journal editors of the correctness of the paper.
DUTIES OF REVIEWERS
Contribution to editorial decisions: Double reviews help the editor make decisions about an article and can also help authors improve their manuscript.
Promptness: Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its timely review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself/herself from the review process.
Confidentiality: All manuscript received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except those authorized by the publisher.
Evaluation standards: Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with appropriate supporting arguments.
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.
Conflicts of interest and their disclosure: Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider evaluating manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relations with any of the authors, companies, or institutions involved in writing a paper.
More information about REVIEW PROCESS
DUTIES OF THE PUBLISHER
Handling of unethical publishing behavior: In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum, clarification, or in the most severe case, the retraction of the affected work. The publisher, together with the editors, shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, and under no circumstances encourage such misconduct or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place.
QUESTIONS AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION:
If you have any questions or complaints please contact with:
Publishing House of the Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology Polish Academy of Sciences
Al. Solidarności 105
00-140 Warsaw, Poland
Phone: (+48 22) 620 28 81 ÷ 86 w. 105
Email: wydawnictwo@iaepan.edu.pl
Publishing House IAE PAN will make reasonable efforts to promptly investigate and, if necessary, to correct any problem.
Authors are not charged any APCs (Article Processing Charges) or other publication fees.
All the articles submitted for publication in "Przegląd Archeologiczny" (Archaeological Review) are screened by iThenticate Plagiarism Checking Software.
