Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Declaration of publication ethics of the Historia Aperta Journal

The declaration of publication ethics of the Historia Aperta (HA) Journal is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

I. Obligations of editors, editor-in-chief and the editorial board

The editors, the editor-in-chief and the editorial board of the journal are responsible for the decision whether a submitted text will be printed or not. In this respect, they consider the publication intent created by the editorial board of the journal, which the editor-in-chief consults published texts with. Editors and the editor-in-chief follow the valid legal regulations. The editorial staff, the editor-in-chief and the editorial board have the right to consult their decisions with other consultants.

Authorial manuscripts are assessed exclusively on the basis of their scientific value and intellectual performance, regardless of the author´s/authors´ race, sex, sexual orientation, religion, ethnic origin, citizenship, nationality or political opinions.

The editorial staff, the editor-in-chief and the editorial board will make every effort to preserve the impartiality of the peer review procedure in order to prevent the disclosure of the identity of the manuscript author/authors to its reviewers and vice versa (observation of principles of the scientific double-blind peer-review process).

The so far unpublished materials included in the manuscript must not be used by anybody who has access to them in their own research without the author´s explicit written consent.

II. Obligations of expert reviewers

If a reviewer does not feel qualified to assess the manuscript or he/she knows that he/she cannot assess it immediately or impartially, he/she notifies the editorial office in good time and will not enter the peer review procedure.

Each manuscript is considered a confidential document and it must not be provided to anyone and discussed with anyone without the author´s consent.

Assessments must be elaborated objectively and they must not include any personal criticism of the author (not even an anonymous one). The reviewer is obliged to deliver his/her arguments clearly and verifiably.

The reviewer will point out any relevant published works that the author does not cite. Each afore published statement must be documented with a respective citation. The reviewer will point out any substantial similarity or overlapping of the manuscript with another published work, which he/she is aware of. In the assessment, the reviewer is obliged to express a suspicion of plagiarism if he/she has clear, verifiable and objective evidence for it.

The reviewer must not assess manuscripts that might represent a conflict of interests, either on the basis of competition, cooperation or other relationships with authors or institutions associated with the manuscript.

III. Obligations of authors

The authorship should be ascribed only to those who have significantly contributed to the concept, form, rendition or interpretation of the submitted study. All those who have most significantly contributed ought to be listed as co-authors. In case other people have contributed to certain substantial aspects of the research project, they should be mentioned in the part dedicated to contributors. The corresponding author (further on referred to as “author“) makes sure that all respective co-authors are stated in the list of the manuscript authors, and vice versa, that those co-authors who have not contributed to the creation of the study are not mentioned in this list. He/she will also ensure that all co-authors have and approve the final version of the submitted contribution and that they agree with this final version being presented to the HA editorial office. All co-authors must be clearly stated at the time of the manuscript submission. Requests for the addition of co-authors after the manuscript has been accepted are subject to the approval by the HA editorial office.

An author of works presenting original research is obliged to provide precise data about the conducted research as well as an objective evaluation of its significance. He/she will accurately state also the foundation data, sources and literature. The article should include sufficient data and references so that it is possible to replicate its contents or to check the veracity of the data the article is based on in relevant sources. Any fraudulent or consciously inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

The author may be requested by the HA editorial office to give evidence for the data and details which his/her research is based on. Under all circumstances, he/she should store the data and materials for the article for a legitimate period after its printing.

By submitting the contribution, the author confirms that he/she has created a completely original work. If he/she has used a part of the work and/or formulations of other published texts, he/she has to cite them properly. In any case, the author must state the authors of used texts in full citation of the used work. The author is obliged to state the publications that have most significantly influenced the nature of the presented work.

The author must not publish any manuscripts describing the same research in more journals. The submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal constitutes unethical behaviour and is unacceptable.

In the manuscript, the author will state any financial or other substantial conflict of interests that could have an impact on the results or the interpretation of his/her research. All sources of the financial support of the published project should be mentioned. 

If the author finds a significant mistake or inaccuracy in his/her published text, it is his/her duty to immediately notify the editorial office of the journal and to cooperate with the editors either to withdraw the article or to publish an announcement about a correction of the article.