Publication ethics

PUBLICATION ETHICS

The journal of Światowit is dedicated to keep the highest ethical standards of the archaeological scientific journal, with respect to the national and international regulations concerning the protection of human cultural heritage. It is an ongoing duty of editors, members of the scientific board, reviewers, and authors to meet those standards, and their cooperation is necessary to ensure excellence of published research. To meet this aim, journal of Światowit implemented the ethical standards recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethic.

Ethical standards

Submitted manuscripts undergo evaluation considering their scientific value, novelty of topic and methods, transparency, and compliance with the journal. Editors, who safeguard the scientific reliability of published papers, may ask authors to apply necessary changes whenever manuscript departure from the standards of scientific excellence.
Authors are obligated to present their own original research not previously published elsewhere and not undergoing publishing procedure in any other journal. Conducted research should be described and presented accurately, with the results interpreted objectively. Manuscripts should contain information sufficient for replication of the study and identification of sources. Information and results cited from other publications should be clearly marked, allowing for identification of the source. All cited publications should be indicated as references. All authors of the manuscript have to be disclosed. Upon a request by Editors, Authors are obligated to disclose the contribution to the paper made by each of them (including authorship of the concept, methods, protocol etc.). The manuscripts are confidential. Editors and Reviewers or persons involved in the publication process cannot use any information from the submitted manuscript before its final publication.
Editors commission a review of the submitted manuscript under instruction of the Editorial Board. Reviewers are experts in the subject discussed by the author(s) of the manuscript. Editors select reviewers who are not in conflict of interest with author(s): a reviewer cannot be affiliated to the same institution as the author, they cannot conduct research together (at present or in the past). Nevertheless, whenever the reviewers feel that there could be a conflict of interest between them and author(s), they should inform Editors. Before accepting the role of a reviewer, a selected researcher is obligated to familiarize themselves with the ethical standards of the journal and confirm this fact with a written statement.
Reviews should be unbiased and objective. Whenever necessary, reviewers can indicate important publications to improve the quality of the paper. Any personal criticism or forms of discrimination are unacceptable in the reviews. The text of the review is confidential and sharing it with unauthorized persons (those who do not take part in the publication process) is unacceptable.
Decisions of the Editorial Board regarding acceptance of a manuscript are based on independent reviews. The reviews may also help improve the manuscript and develop its final form. The Editorial Board is open to dialogue between authors and reviewers.

Policy against scientific misconducts

The Editorial Board see plagiarism (including auto-plagiarism), data falsification, ghost-writing, and guest or gift authorship as a scientific misconduct.
Whenever an Editor or the Reviewer suspects plagiarisms, they are obligated to inform the Editorial Board. In such case, the Editor or Reviewer should provide evidence with marked similarities between the submitted manuscript and other published works. Upon such situation the Editorial Board and members of the Scientific Council are obligated to take all measures to clarify the situation impartially. The measures will be taken depending on the degree of copying. The authors will be informed about the suspected plagiarism and asked to apply necessary changes to omit the plagiarism. However, when the Author(s) answer is unsatisfactory the manuscript will be rejected and the Author(s) superiors and persons responsible for the research governance will be informed about the misconduct.
Presented results should be obtained in the scientific research using the state-of-art methods. The presented methodology and data integrity should not rise any suspicions. Any type of data manipulation (inducing images), data fabrication are seen as scientific misconduct. Whenever, Editor or Reviewer approach data which integrity indicates that they can be manipulated of fabricated should inform the members of the Editorial Board. In such case, the Editorial Board is obligated to seek for independent opinion. When the concerns are sustained, the Editorial Board should contact the corresponding Author or all authors to explain the situation and express concerns about data integrity. When the response will be satisfactory, all parties will be informed about the integrity of data and the publication process will be resumed. If the answer will not be satisfactory, Editors, after contacting all authors, will contact the Author(s) institution requesting investigation. Editors will cooperate with the institution to clarify the situation. If the Authors are found to be clear of charges the Editors, after expressing apologies, will resume the publishing process.
Any person who intellectually contribute to the study and preparation of the manuscript should be considered as an author. Editors are obligated to check whether authors of each task presented and discussed in the study are enlisted. In any doubt Editors will contact with the Correspondent Author or all authors to ask about their role. When the authorship role is missing (so-called ghost author), editors will suggest adding the person responsible to the list. Whenever a listed author does not meet the criteria of the authorship (so-called guest-author), the Editor will suggest transferring the person to the Acknowledgment section. The change of the authorship has to be expressed in writing and has to be accepted by all authors. In case of serious misconduct, e.g., stolen data or results of the research, the Editorial Board will inform the Author(s) supervisors and persons responsible for the research.
Undisclosed conflict of interest may affect the reliability of the study. Therefore, whenever the Editor or Reviewer find the undisclosed conflict of interest of the Author(s), he or she is obligated to inform the Editorial Board. Editors contact the Author(s) expressing concern of possible conflict of interest. After receiving satisfactory explanation and written statement about lack of the conflict of interest, the Editorial Board will proceed with the publication process.
Whenever the Editorial Board come to the conclusion that the misconduct was not solved satisfactory, the Editorial Board will reject the manuscript. Author(s) will be informed in advance. The information, delivered via e-mail, will contain the title of the rejected paper(s) and the arguments supporting the decision.
Editorial Board can also reject a paper that has been already published. Whenever new information about misconduct will reach the Editorial Board, and the explanation will not be satisfactory. In such case the information about the rejection of a paper will be published, and the manuscript will be marked as rejected due to misconduct. At the same time the institution where the authors are affiliated will be informed.
Whenever needed, the Editorial Board is obligated to publish rectifications, explanations, and apologies.

Policy against discrimination

Editors see any form of discrimination as unacceptable practice. The submitted manuscripts are evaluated solely on the ground of scientific excellence, not the gender, race, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, citizenship, or political views of the authors. Submitted manuscripts and texts of the reviews also has to be free from unacceptable phrases. Whenever the Editorial Board will approach any form of discrimination in the submitted manuscripts/reviews, the Author/Reviewer will be asked to reword the sentence/paragraph to avoid unwelcome practices and once again informed about the anti-discriminant policy of the journal of Światowit. In case, the changes are not applied, or did not solve the problem, the manuscript/texts of the review will be rejected/not used in the publishing process.
To minimize the unacceptable practice, the journal of Światowit follows a double-blind review system, so the authors remain anonymous to the reviewers and vice versa. Editors are responsible for personal data protection of authors and reviewers. The only persons authorized to access the personal data of authors are the Editorial Board members and the Publisher.

Erratum

Whenever authors discovers errors in the published paper, they are obligated to inform Editors about the issue and either withdraw the paper or publish an erratum to correct the mistake.