PUBLISHING ETHICS

 In order to maintain high academic standards and research quality, the editorial board follows the principles of strict publishing ethics that function in compliance with the guidelines of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE): http://publicationethics.org.

Authors

1. The author confirms that the submitted manuscript is the result of their own and original work. All other authors who have contributed to the submission and their academic institutions should be mentioned or acknowledged in the text, whereas the scope of each contribution clearly defined. Should the author commit plagiarism or self-plagiarism, the editorial board would demand a detailed explanation regarding the infringement and then implement the procedures in compliance with COPE guidelines, which might include: notifying their academic institution or the employer, rejecting or retracting the manuscript, or refusing future submissions from the author and disallowing them to participate in reviewing or editorial processes in the future.
2. Having received two positive recommendations, the author receives a copyright statement regarding the transfer of rights, which also defines and condemns such malpractices as ghostwriting and guest authorship, whose terms they are bound to accept and sign. Signing the copyright statement is a legal prerequisite of publishing an article in the journal.

Editors

1. Being responsible for the academic standards and profile of the journal, the editors decide upon accepting the manuscripts, initiating the reviewing process, and publishing the submissions. The editors guarantee that non-academic circumstances (i.e. race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnicity, background, nationality, political views) do not affect either assessment or recommendation of submissions.
2. The editors investigate and disclose each case of academic malpractice and are responsible for notifying the academic institutions of the authors who have violated the publishing ethics.
3. The editors shall not disclose any information regarding the submission to any third party not involved in reviewing or editorial processes.
4. Each case of the suspected conflict of interest involving the editors and the author has to be stated in order to exclude the said editors from evaluating the submission.

Reviewers

1. The reviewers know and follow the guidelines for peer-referees accepted by the editorial board.
2. The reviewers assess whether each manuscript is clearly composed and comprehensible, its argument is innovative and original, and its approach is properly applied and reflected in the recent findings in the field of research.
3. The reviewers are supposed to resign from evaluating a manuscript if the review form cannot be submitted on time or the content of the manuscript exceeds the field of expertise of the referee.
4. The reviewed manuscripts are confidential and, thus, shall not be disclosed to the third parties.
5. The reviewers shall not use the reviewed research or any of its parts in their own publications without the permission of the author.
6. Each recommendation has to be properly argued, unbiased, meticulous, and based on academic criteria exclusively.
7. The reviewers shall notify the editors of any case of academic malpractice (including plagiarism), document the parts of the submission that violate the publishing ethics or gather additional evidence of publishing misconduct.