Publication Ethics

The Elpis journal operates in accordance with the Code of Conduct of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). All parties involved in the publication process (editors, authors, reviewers and publishers) should familiarise themselves with the standards of ethical conduct used in journals published by the University of Białystok Publishing House. 

Editor

The editor is responsible for deciding which articles sent to the editor should be published. He is responsible for all the content published in the journal. When making decisions about a publication, the editor should be guided by the policy of the editorial committee of the journal, as well as the legal requirements governing cases of libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. In addition, he has the right to consult with other members of the editorial board and reviewers. The editor must comply with the norms accepted in academic publications, exclude practices that compromise ethical and intellectual norms, and always be prepared to publish corrections, explanations, retractions, and apologies if necessary.

The editor is required to evaluate the submitted articles on the subject matter, regardless of the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnicity, citizenship or political preferences of the author (s). The editor should not disclose any information about the article under review to anyone other than the author, reviewers or potential reviewers, and in certain cases, other members of the editorial board or the editorial committee.

The editor, as well as any other member of the editorial board, should not disclose information about the submitted works to anyone other than the author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial consultants (for example, translators or proofreaders) and the publisher. 

The editor should strive to ensure fair peer review on the merits. Before starting the review process, the editor must disclose possible conflicts of interest arising from competition, collaboration, or other relationships and connections with each of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions associated with the articles proposed for publication. In the event of such situations, the editor should instead ask the co-editors or other members of the editorial board to review the article. Editors should require all employees to disclose any conflicts of interest and publish corrections when such conflicts are disclosed after the publication of the article. If necessary, other appropriate measures should be taken, such as the cancellation of the publication or the publication of a rebuttal.

Author

The author of the article is considered to be a person who has made a significant contribution either to the creation of the concept of the work, or to the analysis and interpretation of data; has made an initial version of the text or made a critical assessment of it, has made a significant intellectual contribution; has decided on the final form of the text in the version in which it should be published.

In case of plagiarism, falsification of data and/or the fact of publication of the work or part of it in other sources (the so-called anti-plagiarism), the article is removed from publication at any stage of preparation. The editorial board will contact the author for clarification, and then take the appropriate steps provided for in the COPE guidelines. In the future, this may mean notifying the authorities of the author's scientific department, refusing to publish this article, as well as any other texts authored by this person.

Before submitting an article, it is necessary to eliminate the threat of two types of publication ethics violations related to authorship, defined by the terms "shadow author" ("ghostwriting") and "guest authorship" ("guest authorship"). "Shadow author" refers to a situation where a person who contributed significantly to the creation of a publication does not appear as its author. "Guest authorship" is the reverse situation, when the author's contribution is negligible or did not take place at all, and he is listed as the author or co-author of the publication.

If more than one person participated in the preparation of the text and the previous studies, then the article should include information about the nature of the contribution, and not about the percentage contribution, of each of the authors. For example, "Contributions from individual authors: XX was responsible for the concept of the study; YY collected the data. Both authors jointly created the original text of the article", or: "Individual authors made the following statements regarding their participation in the research process: research concept: 1st author; data analysis: 2nd author; text creation: 1st author and 2nd author". This information will be published in the published material.

According to the COPE guidelines, any changes to authorship information require the written consent of all authors. Each of them must express this consent separately, in an email addressed directly to the editor-in-chief of the journal. The consent of each of the authors to change the information about the authorship submitted for publication or already published article must take the form of a written statement. It is the responsibility of the corresponding author to give a clear reason for the proposed change (s) and to coordinate the interaction between the authors and the editor-in-chief. If the authors are unable to reach an agreement, they should contact their management, whose responsibility it is to make the final decision. The editorial board does not take part in such disputes. If the procedure described above applies to an already published article, the authorship information is changed by means of publishing a new article containing an adjustment.

 If the author notices significant errors in his/her publication, he/she should notify the editor-in-chief as soon as possible. The editorial board, together with the publisher and in agreement with the author, will make every effort to eliminate these errors. The author should avoid any conflicts of interest, for example, official dependencies, close personal relationships, kinship. 

The author must take part in the review process, that is, give feedback on the review and state whether he/she includes the suggestions contained in it. If the author does not include the comments and suggestions of the reviewer, he must justify his opinion. In this case, the Editorial Board can send the text for re-reviewing.

 

Review process

Each article published in the Elpis journal is subject to a review procedure. The current list of collaborating reviewers is published on the journal's website and is printed annually.

To evaluate each publication, two reviewers are appointed – these are specialists of this scientific discipline who are not members of the scientific unit affiliated with the author of the publication. If the ratings differ, the editor may appoint additional reviewers.

Reviews are prepared in the "double-blind Review process" system, which means that the author or authors of the publication and the reviewers do not know each other.

The review has a written form and contains an unambiguous statement of the reviewer about the admission of the article to publication or its rejection. The review focuses on the content level, the originality and validity of the research, the methodology, the correctness of the conclusions and the way they are presented. The review must be fair, objective, reliable, constructive, consistent with the available knowledge and completed in a timely manner.

The criteria for acceptance or rejection of the publication, as well as a possible review form, are published on the journal's website.

The reviewer must disclose possible cases of plagiarism, suspicions of plagiarism or excessive (duplicate) publication, as well as shortcomings in the citation of data (data manipulation). The reviewer should not use any knowledge about the reviewed work before its publication.

Each peer-reviewed article is treated as a confidential document. It is not provided or discussed with other persons without the permission of the editor. The names of the reviewers of individual articles or publications of the journal are not disclosed.

According to the recommendations of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education, the list of reviewers is published on the journal's website and is published annually in a printed version.

Conflict of interest

A conflict of interest arises when the author (or the scientific unit that he represents), the reviewer, or the editor are involved in an economic or personal relationship that inadequately influences their actions. Other, similar terms are: conflict of obligations and conflict of loyalty.

The potential impact of a conflict of interest on scientific judgment varies between small and very large. It can also occur when the affected person is not aware of it.

The most obvious examples of conflicts of interest are related to economic relations, such as employment, receiving wages, and conducting paid consultations and examinations. Situations of this kind carry the greatest risk of undermining the credibility of the journal, the authors, and even scientific research.

Sources of conflict of interest may include personal relationships or scientific rivalries, as well as political or intellectual passions, etc. Any author and reviewer, in case of any conflict of interest, is obliged to inform the editorial board.

Publisher's statement

In cases of alleged or proven scientific unreliability, unfair publication or plagiarism, the publisher, in close cooperation with the editor of the journal, takes all necessary measures to clarify the situation and make corrections to a particular article. This includes promptly publishing a list of typos or, in justified cases, completely removing the article. In this case, the editorial board will remove any article in which the author has made a scientific inaccuracy, including the electronic version, or the information indicating the reason for the withdrawal of the publication will replace the withdrawn article in all its electronic versions. The editorial board will publish such information in the next printed version of the journal.