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 the 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, autoplagiarism, falsification, and making up data and/or research methodology are all inadmissible. If the author has made use of other works, these should be properly referenced in order to remove any doubt concerning the authorship of the submitted work or any part thereof. Information obtained privately (e.g. in a conversation, correspondence, or discussion) may not be used without the written consent of its source, in which case these likewise should be referenced as to source.

3. Data availability

The Editorial Board does not collect research data, and presentation of the research data management plan is not required in order for a paper to be published. However, in certain circumstances, authors may be asked to provide their research data, either before or after the publication of their paper.

4. Preventing conflicts of interest

Conflicts of interest are relationships that entail professional subordination, economic dependence, or social relationships, any of which can affect impartial assessment of the merits of the text. The editors require all authors to make a statement regarding the absence of any conflicts of interest, and to 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 also 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, including the contributions of all 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.

Principles concerning members of the Editorial Team:

1. Responsibility

The Editorial Team decides which papers will be published, takes care to ensure the quality of published material and, if necessary, is prepared to publish a revision, erratum, or correction if need be. The Editorial Team accepts ultimate responsibility for all the content featured in the journal.

2. Fair play

The papers are assessed on the basis of their merits and their importance for the aims of 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 Editorial Team of the journal is obligated to keep confidential all information related to the editorial process.

4. Complaints and appeals

Complaints against the Journal and/or the Editorial Team may be made in writing and will be considered by the appropriate party. Grievances concerning the journal or the conduct of the editorial board members should be addressed to the Editor-in-Chief. A complaint concerning the conduct of the Editor-in-Chief should be addressed to the Publisher ( and sent in cc to the Editor-in-Chief. The Publisher is under the supervision of the Vice-Rector for Science and Education of The John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin. The subject of a complaint might be, for example, the infringement of the interests of the complaining party, negligence, or the lack of a response in some matter on the part of the Editorial Team. The complaining party should receive a written response toward the resolution of the matter within 30 days of the complaint.

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

The Editorial Team may withdraw a paper from publication or decide 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 Editorial Team uses the Open Journal System, which allows for a comprehensive, electronically-based editorial process. Within this framework, the editor, reviewer, and the author of the text may carry on a discussion and make corrections at each stage of the publication process.

7. Decisions concerning the publication

The decision to publish or not publish the text is made by the Editor-in-Chief after consultations with the Editorial Team. The decision of the Editorial Team is determined, above all else, by the academic merits of the text and its compliance with the thematic scope of the journal.

8. Scientific integrity

Members of the Editorial Team are obliged to take care to ensure the scientific integrity of all 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. Any detected cases of ethical transgression (e.g., plagiarism or falsification of research results, manipulation of research results, inventing research results, etc.) should be reported in writing to the Editorial Team (e-mail of the Editor-in-Chief: Such a report may be submitted by a member of the Editorial Team, a reviewer, a reader of the journal, or any other person who has reason to suspect the integrity of the text. The Editorial Team acts in compliance with the principles formulated by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) If an already-published text is found in violation of ethical principles, the editors will remove the paper from the website, while providing information on the reasons for the 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. In such cases, the Editorial Team will issue notification of the matter to the author, the institution he/she is affiliated with, reviewers, the aggrieved persons, and also, if necessary, to other ethical oversight bodies. If ethical transgressions in the text are minor, it may be possible to republish the corrected text. If there is a conflict of interest within the Editorial Team, in such cases the report should be submitted to the Publisher (

Rules applicable to Reviewers:

1. Cooperation with the editorial team

Reviewers participate in the editorial process at the review stage and influence the decisions made by editors with regard to the publication of a text. They also may, in consultation with the authors, decide on 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 their withdrawal from reviewing a particular text.

3. Confidentiality

Only authorized persons, i.e. the editors, authors, and reviewers, will have access to the reviewed works.

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 where the reviewed work bears significant similarity to other published works, and they should indicate any known sources that have not been properly referenced by the author.

6. Preventing conflicts of interest

Reviewers may not use the reviewed texts for their own personal or professional needs or benefit. If there is a conflict of interest between reviewer(s) and author(s) of the text, such reviewers should be excluded, or should exclude themselves, from the review process.

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, to ensure the highest quality of its publications and to prevent all unfair publication practices (plagiarism, autoplagiarism, ghost-writing, guest authorship or courtesy authorship), applies 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 ( 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 and 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 Editorial Team to make use of a “solution map”, available in the form of COPE-designed flowcharts ( (4) Finally, the Publisher provides an expert legal assessment of problem situations and seeks the best professional advice regarding unfair publishing practices.