Submissions

Author Guidelines

Publication ethics

• The ethical principles of Analecta Archaeologica Ressoviensia have been developed on the basis of the COPE Best Practice Guidlines for Journal Editors  and Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement requirements. They apply to authors, editors, reviewers and the publisher.
• In order to maintain the principles of reliability and the quality of scientific work, the editorial office uses procedures aimed at eliminating practices referred to variously as "ghostwriting", "ghost authorship" and "guest authorship".
• The author declares that the text sent for publication is their original work, has not been previously published, and is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere. In the case of multi-author works, the authors declare that the content of the submitted article has been approved by all of them, they are the sole persons who meet the pertinent authorship criteria, and the order of authors has been accepted by all. The submitting author is obliged to provide information on the contribution made by other authors or collaborators, they also declare that any parts of the text taken from other authors or sources will be properly referenced. Identified cases of plagiarism, self-plagiarism and copyright infringement will result in the exclusion of the submitted text from the publication process.
• The author(s) should disclose all sources of funding for projects in their work, contributions from research institutions, associations and other entities, and any material conflicts of interest that may affect its results or interpretation.
• The Editors perform an initial evaluation of the submitted texts in terms of whether they meet the formal requirements and the level and adequacy of the content to the journal's profile. The race, gender, religious orientation, country of origin, citizenship or political beliefs of the authors do not affect the evaluation of articles in any way.
• The Editors respect the principle of confidentiality. Persons authorized to be informed about the works submitted for publication are: the author, designated reviewers, editors and the publisher.

Peer review

• The submitted texts are assessed by two reviewers, both specialists in the given field. The selection of reviewers is carried out in accordance with the principles of professional ethics. Reviewers cannot be: members of the editorial office of "Analecta Archaeologica Ressoviensia", employees of the same research institution as the author, persons in a personal (kinship, legal relationships), or professional relationship (supervisor - subordinate employee, current scientific cooperation) or be in conflict with the author.
• The review procedure is confidential and takes the form of a double-blind peer-review. Reviewers only judge texts on the basis of their content. Reviewers are not allowed to use their knowledge about the work prior to its publication. If they find that their qualifications are not sufficient to properly assess the ideas presented in the publication, they should inform the editor and refrain from undertaking the review process. In the event of two contradictory evaluations, the editorial office may appoint a third reviewer. The names of the reviewers are published on the editorial page of each volume of Analecta Archaeologica Ressoviensia.
• Articles published in "Analecta Archaeologica Ressoviensia" represent the views of their authors. They should not be treated as identical to the views of the editorial office or the publisher.

Publication process

• The electronic version of the journal "Analecta Archaeologica Ressoviensia" is identical to the paper version.
• The five-step process of submitting a text for publication takes place via an electronic form, after clicking the "Submit an article" button on the journal's home page.
• The author must first register or log in if they already have an account in the system.
• When submitting a text, please follow the "Provide Double Blind Review" recommendations in the "Upload File" step.
• Please complete the ORCID number and affiliation in the "List of co-authors in the "Enter metadata" step. Clicking on the triangle next to the author's name will allow you to edit and enter the relevant data.
• The submitting author is the only contact person for the editorial office in the publication process. They are responsible for communicating with potential co-authors and informing them about the progress, corrections and final approval of the article.
• Submitted articles are first reviewed by the editorial office in terms of whether they meet the formal requirements and if the level and content matches the journal's profile.
• In the case of a positive opinion of the editors, the text is sent for review. This is done using the form available on the journal's home page.
• In the case of two positive reviews, the text is qualifies for publication. If the author receives one negative review, the editorial office may appoint an additional reviewer. Two negative reviews result in the rejection of the text.
• Authors are obliged to take into account the comments of reviewers. If corrections or additions are indicated as necessary by the reviewer as a condition for publication, the author will receive the text in the original format for correction.
• After the text has been typeset, the author will receive a .pdf file for proofreading. At this stage, it is only possible to introduce minor, essential corrections such as the removal of factual or technical errors. The addition of larger fragments of text or rebuilding the structure of the article is not permitted.
• Authors whose texts have been accepted for publication are required to sign a publishing agreement. The contract form is available for download on the journal's home page. The completed agreement, signed and in two copies, should be sent to the editorial office.
• Authors receive a .pdf file of the published article.

Technical information

• Texts accepted for publication are organized in the following sections: Articles, Materials, Overviews and Reviews, Chronicle.
• Editors can only accept texts written in English for publication. Translations cannot be arranged through the journal.
• Please provide the text, illustrations (in .jpg or .tiff format) and tables in separate files. If the legibility of the illustration does not require color, we recommend a black and white version be prepared.
• The text file should contain: 1. title of the article, 2. abstract (up to 150 words), 3. list of 5-6 keywords, 4. main text, 5. list of cited literature, 6. list of captions for figures and tables. The file should not contain author's name and affiliation.
• The text file intended for the "Overviews and Reviews" section should contain: 1. name and surname of the author of the reviewed work and its full bibliographic data with the number of pages, figures and tables, 2. main text, 3. possibly a list of literature cited.
• The preferred text format is Microsoft Word (OpenOffice, Microsoft Word, RTF or WordPerfect are also acceptable), line spacing 1, Times New Roman font, font size 12.
• The illustrative material, regardless of its type (photographs, drawings, charts, plans, maps, etc.) should be continuously numbered and uniformly marked as "Fig." Separate numbering applies to tables signed as "Table". Figures and tables should be numbered in the order in which they are referred to in the text.
• References in the text to tables and figures should be as follows: (Tab. 1), (Fig. 1), (Fig. 3, 5), (Fig. 3: c), (Fig. 4: 4–13; 5 : 1-5, 9).
• Captions to illustrations should contain information about their author or source of origin.
• Surnames and geographical names in non-Latin scripts in the text, as well as entries in the list of cited literature, should be transcribed in accordance with the international ISO 9 standard (https://de.zxc.wiki/wiki/ISO_9). In the list of cited literature, please also provide the titles and names of authors in their original spelling.

Notes and references

• References should be placed in the text according to the following convention: (Blake 1998, 59), (Hüttel 1981, tab. 8: 71), (Bąk 1992, fig. 2: 1-2; Godłowski 1992, tab. 2: 2), for two authors (Kruk and Milisauskas 1983, 259), for three or more authors (Sofer et al. 2000, 814–816).
• Please do not use footnotes.
• A list of literature cited should be placed in alphabetical order after the main body of the text and provided with the heading "References". If desired, authors may further divide the References section with the heading "Web sources" with information about the date of access next to each item.
• If available, please include DOI or URL for bibliographic entries.
• Items in the list of literature cited should be listed in the following manner:

Journal articles

Bogucki P. 1993. Animal traction and household economies in Neolithic Europe. Antiquity 67(256), 492–503.

Kruk J. and Milisauskas S. 1983. Chronologia absolutna osadnictwa neolitycznego z Bronocic, woj. kieleckie. Archeologia Polski 28(2), 257–320.

Snoeck Ch., Lee-Thorp J. A. and Schulting R. J. 2014. From bone to ash: Compositional and structural changes in burned modern and archaeological bone. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 416, 55–68.

Chapters/parts of books/monographs

Iwaniszewski S. 2006. Megalityczny obrządek pogrzebowy i neolityczny krajobraz w mikroregionie stryczowickim na Wyżynie Sandomiersko-Opatowskiej. In J. Libera and K. Tunia (eds.), Idea megalityczna w obrządku pogrzebowym kultury pucharów lejkowatych. Lublin, Kraków: Instytut Archeologii UMCS, Instytut Archeologii i Etnologii PAN O/Kraków, 259–269.

Kulczycka-Leciejewiczowa A. 2006. Kultura ceramiki wstęgowej kłutej w południowej Polsce. In M. Kaczanowska (ed.), Dziedzictwo cywilizacji naddunajskich: Małopolska na przełomie epoki kamienia i miedzi (= Biblioteka Muzeum Archeologicznego w Krakowie 1). Kraków: Muzeum Archeologiczne, 9–21.

Books/monographs (single author/editor)

Czerniak L. 1980. Rozwój społeczeństw kultury późnej ceramiki wstęgowej na Kujawach. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM.

Zych R. 2008. Kultura pucharów lejkowatych w Polsce południowo-wschodniej (= Collectio Archaeologica Ressoviensis 7). Rzeszów: Instytut Archeologii UR.

Hodder I. (ed.) 1991. Archaeological theory in Europe. The last three decades. London: Routledge.

Books/monographs (multiple authors/editors)

Kristiansen K. and Larsson T. B. 2005. The Rise of Bronze Age Society. Travels, Transmissions and Transformations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Czebreszuk J. and Müller J. (eds.) 2004. Ausgrabungen und Forschungen in einer prähistorischen Siedlungskammer Großpolens 1. Forschungsstand. Erste Ergebnisse. Das östliche Feuchtbodenareal (= Studien zur Archäologie in Ostmitteleuropa 2). Poznań, Kiel, Rahden (Westf.): UAM w Poznaniu, CAU zu Kiel.

In the case of subsequent works by the same author 

Gediga B. 2007. Problemy obrazu kultury wczesnej epoki żelaza na Śląsku w świetle nowych badań terenowych. Śląskie Sprawozdania Archeologiczne 49, 123–146.

Gediga B. 2010. Śląsk – regionalna prowincja kultury halsztackiej. In B. Gediga and W. Piotrowski (eds.), Rola głównych centrów kulturowych w kształtowaniu oblicza kulturowego Europy Środkowej we wczesnych okresach epoki żelaza (= Biskupińskie Prace Archeologiczne 8; PAN O/Wrocław. Prace Komisji Archeologicznej 18). Biskupin-Wrocław: Muzeum Archeologiczne w Biskupinie, Komisja Archeologiczna PAN O/Wrocław, 187–218.

Thompson T. 2015a. Fire and the body: Fire and the people. In T. Thomspon (ed.), The archaeology of cremation. Burned human remains in funerary studies. Oxford, Philadelphia: Oxbow Books, 1–17.

Thompson T. 2015b. The analysis of heat-induced crystallinity change in bone. In C. W. Schmidt and S. A. Symes (eds.), The analysis of burned human remains. Second edition. Oxford: Elsevier, 323–337.