Ethical Standards
General Principles
Our journal is committed to upholding rigorous ethical practices, following the guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
Standards for Authors and Manuscripts
- Authorship
Authorship is reserved for individuals who have genuinely contributed to the research process, data interpretation, and substantial portions of the manuscript. The Editorial Board rejects unethical practices such as ghostwriting or guest authorship. Individuals who only offer supervision, consultation, or language editing are not considered authors; instead, they should be acknowledged with a clear description of their role.
If concerns arise regarding authorship integrity, the Board may investigate, decline publication, or notify relevant institutional authorities.
For multi-author submissions, contributors must specify their proportional contribution. Authors are responsible for the article’s content and structure, must disclose funding sources, and must identify any external contributions.
- Scholarly and Methodological Standards
The journal accepts only original academic work grounded in reliable, well-documented sources and produced in accordance with academic integrity. Fabrication or manipulation of data is strictly prohibited. Should such issues be discovered, the Board will conduct a thorough inquiry and follow COPE procedures. If problems emerge after publication, corrections will be issued online.
The journal does not accept previously published material, submissions under review elsewhere, book fragments, compilations, or any form of duplicate publication. Any such cases will be handled according to COPE guidelines.
For editions of primary sources, authors should follow an appropriate publishing instruction and cite it. When using extensive private or non-institutional materials (including photographs), authors must obtain permission from the rights holders.
- Plagiarism
All submissions undergo screening with the use of an anti-plagiarism system. The Editorial Board protects copyright and academic integrity and condemns all forms of plagiarism. Suspected cases are examined to determine their scope. If uncredited borrowing is found, authors are contacted for explanation. Complete or substantial plagiarism results in rejection, and the Board may notify relevant authorities.
- Conflict of Interest
Manuscript evaluation and editorial decisions must remain neutral and unbiased. Any potential conflicts—professional, financial, or personal—are identified and assessed to prevent undue influence. This policy also applies to reviews and review articles to ensure that personal relationships do not affect scholarly judgment.
- Corrections and Errata
When errors are identified, the Board issues errata and posts corrections on the article’s webpage. In cases of serious errors, the article may be retracted. Authors must inform the Board if they discover significant inaccuracies and cooperate in correcting them.
Standards for Editorial Board Members
- Professional Conduct
The Editorial Board oversees every stage of the editorial workflow and is responsible for the quality of all published material. Decisions regarding acceptance are based on academic merit and the quality of submissions. Manuscripts may be rejected, withdrawn, or returned for major revisions. The Board encourages scholarly discussion and adheres to COPE guidelines, maintaining confidentiality throughout the editorial process. Serious ethical violations may lead to withdrawal of the manuscript and notification of appropriate authorities.
- Conflicts of Interest and Board Members’ Publications
The Board operates with impartiality and actively avoids conflicts of interest. Members may not use unpublished submissions for any purpose without the author’s explicit consent.
Board members may publish in the journal, but they are excluded from the editorial process for their own submissions and remain anonymous to reviewers.
Standards for Reviewers
- Conflict of Interest
If a reviewer has a conflict of interest with an author, the Editorial Board assigns a different reviewer.
- Professionalism
The journal uses a double-blind review system. Each submission is evaluated by two experts in the relevant field. Reviewers help shape the final version of the manuscript and influence the publication decision. They must not share manuscripts with anyone outside the editorial process and must submit reviews on time and in the required format. If the two reviews differ significantly, a third reviewer may be appointed, whose assessment will be decisive.
- Objectivity
Reviews must be based solely on academic and formal criteria. Evaluations should focus on the manuscript itself rather than the identity of the author.
