Ethical Guidelines

The EETJR’s definite aim is to maintain not only a high quality of published texts but also the highest possible level of their academic credibility. We consider this not only a sign of good manners but also a clear sign of social responsibility. The EEJTR assures the standards of ethical matters in the highest possible degree and in accordance with the COPE’s Core Practices.

All parties involved in the publication process (authors, reviewers, editors, publisher) will become familiar with the standards of ethical behavior.


Obligations of Authors

Authorship
Authorship should be acknowledged only in the case of persons who have made a significant contribution into the conception and implementation of research, as well as into the interpretation of the published outcomes. Before an article is submitted to the publisher, it should be ascertained that all the authors have been acknowledged and that all of them have approved the final version of the text.

Pursuant thereto, a protection policy against “ghostwriting” and “guest authorship” has been implemented and authors are required to submit an Author Statement disclosing the scope of input of particular authors to the publication, as well as the funding source of the publication, contribution of research institutions, associations and other entities.

”Ghostwriting” is understood as a failure to include the name of a person who has made a significant contribution to the text as an author or co-author of the publication or at the very least to mention such person’s name in the acknowledgements.

“Guest authorship” is understood as a reverse situation where the name of a person is included in the text as an author or co-author even though their contribution to the publication is either insignificant or non-existent.

The Editorial Board of the EEJTR considers the accuracy of the information included in the Statement to be the sole liability of the person(s) signing it.

The Editorial Board of the EEJTR will disclose any instances of ghostwriting or guest authorship detected and send an informative note to the relevant institution(s).

Disclosure and conflict of interest
Authors should reveal all the sources of project financing used for their research, the contribution of science and research institutions and other entities, as well as all the significant conflicts of interest which might affect its results or interpretation.

Submission standards
Articles submitted for publication in the journal must be original work, not subject to copyright owned by any third party, and not having been published before. Scientific texts which contain their authors' own research results should include a detailed description of the methodology used to conduct the investigation. Apart from the scientific text, authors are requested to provide the editorial board with unprocessed data used in the work. Providing false or deliberately inaccurate information is unethical.
Authors should not publish materials describing the same research in more than one journal, or primary publication. Submitting the same article to more than one journal is unethical, and thus forbidden.
It is also regarded as unethical to submit a science article that is a translation of an already published text or is currently considered for publication elsewhere.

Access to data and retention of data 
Authors should provide the editors with unprocessed data used in the course of their work on the article submitted for reviewing, or be prepared to enable the editors to access such data. They should, moreover,  retain the data for a year after the publication.

Mistakes detected after submission of text
Whenever the author discovers a mistake or an inaccuracy in a text that has already been submitted, they are obliged to promptly notify the editors of the fact.

Originality and plagiarism
Authors send in only original texts. They should make certain that the names and/or quotations used in their work are cited correctly. Plagiarism shall be treated as unethical and unacceptable.

Any infringement of the above described ethical principles are grounds for rejection of submitted articles.

 

Obligations of Reviewers

Timeliness
Reviewers who are unable to write a review in the allotted time (or at all) are requested to promptly notify the Editorial Secretary about it.

Objectivity
Reviews should be written in an objective manner, in accordance with ethical standards, on the basis of scientific arguments, and should aim to raise the scholarly value of the text. Personal criticism of the author is considered inappropriate.

Confidentiality
All the reviewed articles are treated as confidential documents. They are not to be shown to any other persons, or discussed outside the Publishing Committee. Moreover, they must not be used for the personal benefit of the reviewers.

Anonymity
All the reviews are conducted anonymously. The editors do not reveal the personal data of the authors to the reviewers.

Conflict of interests
Reviewers should not assess texts written by authors with whom they might be in a conflict of interests resulting from any existing relationships of personal, professional, or institutional nature.

Verification of originality
Reviewers should notify the Editorial Secretary of any infringement of ethical standards by the author(s) of assessed texts, including significant similarity, or partial overlapping of the content of the reviewed article with other published work with which they are familiar, or any suspicion of plagiarism.

 

Obligations of Editor-in-Chief and Editorial Board

Responsibility for published texts
The Editor-in-Chief is obliged to respect the current legislation concerning libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief also takes responsibility for deciding which of the submitted articles should be published. Such decisions are based on the reviews, and on the opinions issued by the subject editors and the Publishing Committee. Another factor that can influence the Editor-in-Chief's decision is the risk of infringement of copyright or other intellectual property rights, plagiarism, as well as doubt as to the text's authorship or co-authorship.

Impartiality
The process of deciding whether to accept or reject a given text is based on the text's originality, scientific quality and relevance for the journal's readership, regardless of the background of the author(s), their nationality, ethnicity, political views, gender, race, or confession.

Confidentiality
The editors do not reveal to reviewers any data regarding the authors, or vice versa. Information obtained in the process of assessment of a publication, as well as the rejected articles, or their fragments, must not be used by the editors or reviewers in their own research without an explicit written consent of the author.

Conflict of interests prevention
The editors do not appoint as reviewers persons who are in a direct reporting relationship, or in any other direct personal relationships, with the authors of texts.

Publisher responsibilities

Complaints and appeals
The Publisher is obliged to collect and share with journal editors all complains and appeals against the journal, its staff, editorial board and the Publisher itself.

Handling of unethical publishing behaviour
In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum, clarification or, in the most severe case, the retraction of the affected work. The publisher, together with the editors, shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, and under no circumstances encourage such misconduct or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place.

 

The Ethical Guidelines have been developed on the basis of recommendations proposed by COPE Committee on Publication Ethics included in Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers, and the publication "Good Practice in Reviewing Procedures in Science".