CODE OF ETHICS

„Logopedia Silesiana” follows the principles of publication ethics and publication malpractice statement, in particular, principles in accordance with Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines.

Responsibilities of the editor

The editor follow a uniform procedure for evaluating, reviewing, and publishing submitted articles.

The editor ensures the academic quality of the articles. Before submitting a manuscript for reviewing, the editor studies the text and in the case of noticing significant deficiencies or shortcomings addresses the author with a request for revisions and corrections. The editor does not submit for reviewing texts which in their opinion do not fulfill the requirements or criteria of an academic article.

In evaluating submitted articles, the editor considers the following criteria: originality, relevance to the field of study, to the scope and to the editorial policy of the journal, observance of the requirements for the scientific workshop and the substantive level of content, observance of all legal regulations concerning defamation, copyright and related rights, image rights, and the compliance with editorial guideline.

In evaluating a submitted article, the editor shall not consider the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or the Author's political and worldview beliefs, unless such beliefs violate applicable laws.

The final decision concerning sending for reviewing, acceptance for publication or rejecting the manuscript is made by the editor-in-chief.

In the evaluation of submitted manuscripts, a member of the editorial team is obliged to disclose to other members any potential conflict of interest between him and the author of the evaluated manuscripts. In such a situation, the member of the editorial team does not participate in evaluating the manuscripts.

The editor tries to prevent with due diligence phenomena such as plagiarism, ghostwriting or guest authorship.

The editor uses a double-blind review procedure in the peer review process.

To evaluate submitted article the editor appoint at least two independent reviewers from Poland or abroad, from outside the editorial team, from outside the publishing institution and from outside the author's center.

The editor ascertains that all evaluations and judgment in the reviewing procedure are objective. 

The editor ensure that there are no conflicts of interest between the author and the peer reviewer (employment relations, close personal relations, family relations, etc.). 

The editor ensures the confidentiality of data gathered at any stage of the publication process, except for data contained in articles that have been submitted for publication and published in the journal.

Unpublished original material submitted to the journal shall never be used by the Editor or any party privy to the material prior to its publication (listed in the "Confidentiality" section of this document above) for their own research purposes without the author's explicit written consent.

Peer reviewers’ responsibilities

The peer reviewer will disclose to the editor any conflict of interest. The peer reviewer shall decline the reference upon the discovery of any conflict of interest and shall inform the editor about such instances.

The peer reviewer will deliver the review promptly or will notify the editorial team about any circumstances that make it impossible to meet the review submission deadline.

The peer reviewer will be impartial in their evaluation of the submission.

The peer reviewer will express his or her views clearly and unambiguously, supporting them with argument. The peer reviewer will never use ad-hominem arguments.

The peer reviewer will provide the editor with information that will allow them to make an informed decision concerning the publication of the material.

The peer reviewer will provide the author with relevant information allowing him or her to revise her contribution to meet the highest standards of academic quality or to improve their writing in the future.

The peer reviewer, taking into account all his/her knowledge, is obliged to point out the following in the reviewed article: deficiencies in the documentation of sources, potential plagiarism, significant similarities in statements or research between the reviewed article and any other publication, violations of ethical principles.

The peer reviewer will not use the reference to strengthen their own academic or professional status.

The reviewed articles are treated as confidential documents. The reviewers must not disseminate the review or any information about the article.

Author’s responsibilities 

Authors shall submit only original papers, not previously published (with certain exceptions – see further), duly quoting and properly documenting source materials, along with consideration of all researchers and authors whose work made the submitted article possible.

All authors of the manuscript must be listed. Authorship of an article includes all those who did the work necessary to conduct the research that formed the basis of the article or otherwise contributed to the article, in particular, had a role in data collection and preparation, conceptual work, research methodology, conduct of the research, analysis of sources or of obtained data. All such individuals, without exception, will be listed as authors (so regardless of status in academic structures, for example).

Individuals who have not contributed to the paper will not be included as authors of the paper under any circumstances.

The author of the submitted article should include the information about all individuals and institutions who contributed to the creation of the manuscript in terms of content, donations, etc.

All authors shall disclose instance of the conflict of interest to the editorial team, especially financial, or other substantive interests that might influence the results of research or interpretation of data.

Authors present: honest and precise descriptions of their research procedures, reliable and intersubjectively verifiable data, an impartial, methodologically sound, discussion of the data.

Authors must not present information that is false, unverified, distorts the statements of other authors, and violates ethical principles, infringing the rights of third parties.

Authors shall never submit plagiarized work, be it a plagiarism based on uncredited translation, uncredited citation or reference to someone else's unpublished work, or ideas knowingly harvested from others, including students, whose unpublished work remains theirs.

Submitting authors agree that plagiarism and fraud are not only crimes, but also the most degrading acts in the space of academia, and therefore shall take special care that no part of their work should leave any doubt in terms of academic honesty.

Authors shall not submit material published previously elsewhere, except by explicit invitation of the Editors, who see the reprint of already copyrighted material as important to the overall concept of the issue.

A previously published text may be accepted for publication if the manuscript is its first translation into Polish, English, French, German, Russian, Spanish and Italian.

An article submitted to “Logopedia Silesiana” that has not yet been published cannot be submitted by the author for publication elsewhere.

Upon request, Authors shall provide raw data for assessment of the Editorial Board supported by an expert in the field represented by the contribution, and shall be prepared to make the data available publically if necessary (if laws allow it and individual, including proprietary and confidentiality rights, are not imperiled).

If the author notices significant errors in their publication, they are obliged to immediately notify the Editorial Team, attaching an erratum.

Sources

The principles and practices presented here are based on: Core practice (go to page), Guidelines on good publication practice (download PDF), Dobre praktyki w procedurach recenzyjnych w nauce [Good practices in review procedures in science], compiled by. W. Marciszewski et al., Warsaw 2011 (download PDF), Rzetelność w badaniach naukowych oraz poszanowanie własności intelektualnej [Reliability in scientific research and respect for intellectual property], oprac. J. Hartman et al., Warsaw 2012 (download PDF).

Plagiarism checking service

“Logopedia Silesiana” uses the similarity check service offered by the Crossref association – Similarity Check (go to page), based on the iThenticate software. This system allows to check the similarity of the submitted article to any of billions of online sources and texts provided by other publishers who also use Similarity Check service.