The Editorial Board of the journal "Studia Norwidiana" will ensure the highest quality of the materials published and will undertake all possible actions against any neglect of publication standards in the journal. All parties involved in the publication process: the author, the editor of the scholarly journal, the reviewer of a scholarly work, and the publisher are obligated to adhere to the ethical standards in scholarly publications.
The rules presented below were developed on the basis of Elsevier and the recommendations of COPE, the Committee on Publication Ethics, which were included in the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors as well as the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers and also the code of Good Practice in scholarly reviews.
DUTIES OF THE EDITORIAL BOARD
The Editor-in-chief shall be accountable for all materials published in the journal "Studia Norwidiana". The decision to accept or reject a given scholarly work shall be based on its importance, originality, clarity, as well as the relevance of the research and its reference to the subject matter of the journal.
Articles shall be assessed based on their quality and importance to the scholarly journal, without regard to the origin of the author of the work, his or her nationality, ethnicity, political views, sex, race or faith.
The Editorial Board of the journal is obliged to keep confidential all information regarding the work obtained at any stage of the publication process, excluding the information revealed by the scholarly journal.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Information obtained during the publication process cannot be used by members of the Editorial Board or reviewers without the explicit written consent of the author.
Involvement and cooperation in investigations
The Editorial Board shall undertake all relevant actions in the event of a suspicion or allegation of misconduct being raised, in relation to both published and unpublished works.
DUTIES OF REVIEWERS
Contribution to Editorial Decision
A reviewer shall support the Editor-in-chief in making editorial decisions in the publication process.
The reviewer should agree to review only those works for which he or she has the relevant expertise to allow him or her to present a considered opinion within a given time.
The reviewer shall be obliged to respect the confidentiality of the peer review process and not to disclose any details concerning the work or the review.
Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be an objective and constructive assessment of the reviewed work. The reviewers' comments should not contain any offensive or libelous remarks.
Acknowledgement of Source
Reviewers should identify any published works that were not cited by the author. Any similarity to works of other authors should be reported to the Editor-in-chief.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Information obtained in the process of reviewing a scholarly work cannot be used for the reviewer's own benefit. Reviewers are obliged to notify the Editor-in-chief of all possible conflicts of interest (a reviewer cannot remain in a business relation or close personal relations with the author of the reviewed work, and more importantly, he or she cannot be related to the author).
DUTIES OF AUTHORS
Data Access and Retention
The author should keep detailed records of all the source data for his or her publication, and he or she may be asked to provide access to those data, so that they can be used in the publishing process.
Originality and Plagiarism
The author should confirm that the work submitted for publication is original. All cited content should be quoted in the proper manner. Plagiarism shall be treated as unethical and unacceptable conduct.
Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
The author should confirm that the work submitted for publication has not been published and is not subject to the verification/evaluation process in any other publishing company. Submitting the same publication to more than one journal is unethical and unacceptable.
Acknowledgement of Sources
The author should quote the publications which had an influence on his or her work in the proper manner. Information obtained privately cannot be used without the explicit written consent of the author.
Authorship of the Paper
Authorship should be restricted to those persons who participated significantly in the creation, formulation and interpretation of a work. The author is obliged to indicate all co-authors, who contributed to the publication, and to obtain their consent to publication.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
The author should disclose all information on the sources of financing for the publication, as well as the contributions of scholarly and research institutions, associations and other entities, and should report all potential conflicts of interest.
Fundamental errors in published works
The author should immediately notify the Editor-in-chief if he or she notices significant errors in his or her publication. An erratum slip, appendix, correction or withdrawal of publication should be published in cooperation with the Editor-in-chief and the publisher.
Explanation of "ghostwriting"
Reliability in scientific research is one of its qualitative foundations. Readers should always have confidence that authors of publications present the results of their work in a clear, reliable and honest manner, regardless of the fact if they are the original authors of these publications or if they used any help from a specialist (natural or legal person).
Openness of information about any party’s contribution to preparing a publication (content-related, material, financial, etc.) is the proof of an ethical attitude of a research worker as well as high editorial standards. It also indicates good practice and social responsibility.
"Ghostwriting" and "guest authorship" are opposite examples.
"Ghostwriting" means someone’s significant contribution to a publication without revealing this person’s name among the authors or mentioning it in the acknowledgements.
"Guest authorship" ("honorary authorship") means listing a person’s name as an author/co-author of a publication despite the fact that this person’s contribution is insignificant or non-existent.
"Ghostwriting" and "guest authorship" indicate scientific unreliability. Any cases of such irregularities will be exposed and reported by the Editorial Office to appropriate entities (institutions that hire authors, learned societies, peer review committees, etc.).
In order to prevent any cases of "ghostwriting" and "guest authorship" the Editorial Office of "Roczniki Nauk Prawnych" requires authors of publications to reveal the input of individual persons in preparing the publication (including their affiliations and contributions, i.e. the author of the idea, the presuppositions, the method, the protocol, etc. used in the publication). The main person responsible for meeting these requirements is the author submitting the publication for printing. The Editorial Office also requires information on the sources of financing the publication as well as the contribution of any research institutions, associations and other parties ("financial disclosure").
The Editorial Board of the journal "Studia Norwidiana" has implemented a preventative procedure against ghostwriting.
Based on the materials prepared by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education and information found on the Polish Scholarly Bibliography website.