Publication Ethics
The journal’s activities are based on strict adherence to the ethical standards of COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) and the Elsevier framework (PERK). The editorial team guarantees confidentiality, impartiality, and transparency at all stages.
1. Requirements for Authors
By submitting a manuscript, researchers confirm the exclusivity and scientific novelty of the material.
- Originality: plagiarism, self-plagiarism, or submission of fabricated data is strictly prohibited.
- No Duplication: the article must not have been previously published or be under consideration elsewhere.
- Citation Ethics: all borrowed material must be appropriately referenced, including the author’s previous works.
- Objectivity: avoid political bias and ideological manipulation.
- Error Correction: if the author identifies significant inaccuracies after submission, they must immediately notify the editor for corrections or withdrawal of the work.
2. Reviewer Conduct
Experts play a crucial role in ensuring the quality of scientific content:
- Objectivity: review must be reasoned and free from bias.
- Confidentiality: the manuscript is a confidential document; it must not be discussed with third parties or used for personal purposes prior to publication.
- Adherence to Deadlines: reviewers are required to comply with the deadlines set by the editorial team.
- Ethical Oversight: in case of conflict of interest or suspicion of plagiarism, the reviewer must promptly report it to the editorial board.
3. Mission and Responsibilities of the Editorial Board
The editorial team ensures academic integrity:
- Equality: work is evaluated solely based on intellectual value, irrespective of the author’s gender, race, religion, or political views.
- Content Quality: materials lacking scientific value or violating copyright will not be published.
- Author Interaction: editors do not alter the content without the author’s agreement and offer guidance on meeting international standards.
- Evaluation Mechanism: mandatory use of double-blind peer review.
ETHICS RULES AND LEGAL ASPECTS
Conflict of Interest Management
To ensure fair expert evaluation, the following measures are implemented:
- Self-Recusal: editorial board members and reviewers must recuse themselves from manuscripts if they have competing interests with the authors or organisations.
- Prohibition of Use: anyone with access to unpublished materials cannot use them for personal purposes without the author’s written consent.
- Complaint Handling: the editorial team responds promptly to complaints about ethical violations raised by readers or experts.
Ethics of Research Involving Humans
Scientific research involving human resources (surveys, interviews, experiments) imposes strict obligations on authors. The editorial team requires full adherence to the following protocols:
Institutional Approval
- Any research must be pre-approved by an ethics committee or institutional review board (IRB).
- If such approval is not required by law, authors must provide an official document of exemption or a clear reference to the relevant legal provision.
Informed Consent and Voluntariness
- Participants must be fully informed about the purpose, methods, and potential risks of the research.
- Participation must be voluntary.
- Authors are required to obtain written consent for participation and subsequent publication of results.
Protection of Participants
- Confidentiality and anonymity must be guaranteed.
- Any form of coercion or discrimination during data collection must be avoided.
- Ethical justification must be provided in the article.
Important: the editorial team follows leading international regulations: the American Sociological Association Code of Ethics (1997), ICC/ESOMAR standards (2025), and the European Commission directives on data protection (2021).
PUBLISHING POLICY AND PROCEDURES
Authorship and Funding Declaration
- Authorship Criteria: co-authors must have made significant contributions to the concept, data analysis, or manuscript preparation. Other contributors are acknowledged in the “Acknowledgements” section.
- Financial Transparency: authors must clearly state the sources of funding (grants, internal funds, etc.). If no funding was received, this should be stated as “The research received no funding”.
- Advertising: the journal does not publish advertisements, ensuring complete editorial independence.
DATA SHARING AND POST-PUBLICATION DISCUSSIONS
The journal supports an open science culture, balanced with respect for copyright and privacy.
Scientific Data Exchange Regulation
The journal does not require authors to make raw data publicly available but implements a transparent mechanism for accessing it:
Request: interested parties send an official letter to the editorial team indicating the purpose of using the data.
Mediation: the editorial team acts as an intermediary, forwarding the request to the authors.
Decision: access is granted only with the author's voluntary consent. The editorial team respects the right to refuse due to legal or ethical constraints.
Post-Publication Scientific Discussions
We believe the release of an article is just the beginning of the dialogue.
The editorial team encourages discussions of published works on PubPeer. Each article, with its DOI, can easily be identified for comment. Any well-argued concerns or doubts regarding integrity raised on PubPeer will trigger an internal investigation. If critical errors or violations are confirmed through professional discussion, the editorial team will proceed according to the retraction or correction policy.
Discussion Requirements: professional tone, no personal attacks, and focus on scientific argumentation.