STANDARDS OF ETHICS

Rules applicable to authors

1. Scientific integrity

The author is obliged to conduct and present scientific research in a reliable way and to interpret it objectively. The text should disclose sources of data and information that will allow the research to be replicated.

2. Originality

The text should represent the intellectual property of the author. Plagiarism, self-plagiarism, falsification and making up data and research methods are inadmissible. If the author has made use of other works, these should be properly referenced in order to remove any doubts concerning the authorship of the work or any part thereof. Information obtained privately (e.g. in a conversation, correspondence, discussion) may not be used without the written consent of its author.

3. Data availability

The Editorial Board does not collect research data and the presentation of the research data management plan does not constitute a requirement that must be met in order for a paper to be published. However, in certain circumstances authors may be asked to provide research data.

4. Preventing conflicts of interest

Conflicts of interest are relationships that entail professional subordination and economic dependence as well as social relations, which can affect impartial assessment of the merits of the text. The editors require the author to make a statement on the lack of conflict of interest and provide information that will help to prevent such conflict.

5. Authorship

The authorship of a work should be limited to persons who have made a significant contribution to the text. In order to prevent cases of academic dishonesty, such as ‘ghost-writing’ and ‘guest authorship’, all persons who have made a contribution to the publication should be mentioned as co-authors. All authors must approve the final version of the work and agree to its publication. In their written statement, the authors indicate their contribution to the creation of the work submitted. All persons who have taken part in certain important aspects of creating the work (e.g. language verification) should be identified. If there are others who participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be mentioned, for example, in the “Acknowledgements.” The authors assume collective responsibility for their work. The authors should also provide the editorial board with information on the sources of financing of the publication and contributions from academic research institutions, associations and other entities (“financial disclosure”).

6. Source reliability

The publications that influenced the author’s work should be properly quoted. Information obtained privately may not be used without the written consent of the author.

7. Ethical supervision

If the scope of the published consent covers research on humans and/or animals, the author should provide the consent of the Ethics Committee or another appropriate authorisation for such research.

8. Errors in published works

If the author notices significant errors in their publication, they should immediately notify the Editor-in-Chief. An erratum, annex or correction should be published in cooperation with the Editor-in-Chief and the publisher or the publication should be withdrawn.

9. Avoiding multiple, redundant or concurrent publications

Results of research may not be published in more than one journal. Submitting a paper for publication is understood as a declaration that the text has never been previously published anywhere, including in electronic form, and that it has not been submitted for publication in other journals nor is it a part of a non-serial publication, such as a monograph.

Rules applicable to the editors

1. Responsibility

The editors decide which papers will be published, take care to ensure the quality of published material and, if necessary, are ready to publish a revision, erratum or correction if need be. The editors accept responsibility for all the content featured in the journal.

2. Fair play

The papers are assessed on the basis of their merits and importance for the journal, regardless of the affiliation of the author of the work, their nationality, ethnicity, political views, gender, race or religious denomination.

3. Confidentiality

The editors of the journal are under the obligation to keep confidential any information related to the editorial process.

4. Complaints and appeals

A complaint against the journal and/or the editors should be in writing. A complaint concerning the journal or the conduct of the Editorial Board members should be addressed to the Editor-in-Chief; if a complaint concerns the conduct of the Editor-in-Chief, it should be addressed to the publisher (repozytorium@kul.pl) and sent in cc to the Editor-in-Chief. The subject of the complaint may be, for example, the infringement of the interests of the complaining party, negligence, protracted response or lack of response in the matter on the part of the editors. The complaining party should receive written information on the resolution of the matter submitted within 30 days of the complaint.

5. Verification of materials already published and prevention of conflicts of interest

The editors may withdraw a paper from publication or make a decision to correct materials that have already been published. Unpublished materials may not be used in the publishing process without the written consent of the author.

6. Discussion and corrections

The editors use the Open Journal System that allows them to follow a comprehensive, electronically-based editorial process, within which the editor, reviewer and the author of the text may carry out a discussion and make corrections at each stage of the publication process.

7. Decisions concerning the publication

The decision to publish or not to publish the text is made by the editorial team. The decision of the editors is determined, first of all, by the academic merits of the text and its compliance with the thematic scope of the journal.

8. Scientific integrity

The editors are obliged to take care to ensure scientific integrity of the published works. If dishonest practices are suspected, the editors are obliged to withdraw the text from publication and to take steps to explain and remedy the situation. The detected cases of transgression of ethics (plagiarism, falsification of research results, manipulation of research results, inventing research results, etc.) should be reported in writing to the journal’s Editor-in-Chief or Assistant Editor. The report may be submitted by an Editor, reviewer, reader of the Journal or any other person who holds suspicions as to the integrity of the text. The editors act in compliance with the principles formulated on https://publicationethics.org. In the event that transgression of ethical principles concerns a text that has already been published, the editors will remove the paper from the website, providing information on the reasons for withdrawal and, in the case of a text published in print, the editors will publish an appropriate statement in the next edition of the journal. The editors will notify the author of the matter, the institution he/she is affiliated with, reviewers, the aggrieved persons and also, if necessary, other ethical oversight bodies. If ethical transgressions in the text are minor, it will be possible to republish the corrected text. If there is a conflict of interest among the editors, the report should be submitted to the publisher (repozytorium@kul.pl).

Rules applicable to reviewers

1. Cooperation with the editors

Reviewers participate in the editorial process at the review stage and have an influence on the decisions made by editors with regard to the publication of the text. They also may, in consultation with the authors, decide the final shape of the paper.

2. Timely performance

Reviewers are required to meet a set review deadline. The reviewer should immediately inform the editorial board of the reasons for delays or of withdrawal from reviewing the text.

3. Confidentiality

Only authorised persons, i.e. the editors, authors and reviewers have access to the reviewed work.

4. Objectivity

The review should concern only substantive and formal aspects of the text. Any remarks concerning the authors are inadmissible.

5. Source reliability

The reviewer should disclose all cases that indicate the similarity of the reviewed work to other works and indicate which works have not been referenced by the author.

6. Preventing conflicts of interest

Reviewers may not use the reviewed texts for their own needs and benefits. If there is a conflict of interest between reviewer(s) and author(s) of the text, such reviewers should be excluded from the review procedure.

Rules applicable to the publisher

The John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin, as the owner and publisher of the academic journals of the University, will ensure the highest quality of its publications and prevent all unfair publication practices (plagiarism, autoplagiarism, ghost-writing, guest authorship or courtesy authorship); it will also apply principles of publication ethics in conformity with the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin provides its journals with significant support in this regard, which takes several forms:

1. The digital system iThenticate (https://www.ithenticate.com/http://www.ithenticate.com/) cross-checks for textual similarity with 91% of most often quoted journals worldwide. It provides the option of viewing the content of papers, making it possible to detect a potential instance of plagiarism before embarking on the review process and, hopefully, to resolve the problematic issues. Their ‘Final Similarity Reports’ provide certainty that the published papers are original and the content of journals is indexed within the CrossRef-Similarity Check initiative, again, with the purpose of preventing academic and professional plagiarism.
2. Open Journal Systems (OJS) is a platform for managing the publishing process and for publishing journals online. OJS provides mechanisms that make it possible to hold a discussion between the author and editor as well as between the editor and reviewers, and to revise, correct or withdraw papers after their publication.
3. In the event that unfair research practices are detected, the publisher encourages the editors to make use of a ‘solution map’, available in the form of COPE-designed flowcharts (https://publicationethics.org/resources/translated-resources/polish-all-flowcharts).
4. Finally, the publisher provides an expert legal assessment of problem situations and seeks the best professional advice regarding unfair publishing practices.