Ethics

The standards of ethics of the journal “Studia Iuridica” are defined according to COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. They concern authors, editors, reviewers, and the Publisher.

All manuscripts submitted to the journal “Studia Iuridica” are checked in order to assure their compliance with the ethical publication standards, as well as to assess their scientific reliability and value.

PUBLICATION ETHICS

The standards of ethics of the journal “Studia Iuridica ” are defined according to COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. They concern authors, editors, reviewers, and the Publisher.

All manuscripts submitted to the journal “Studia Iuridica ” are checked in order to assure their compliance with the ethical publication standards, as well as to assess their scientific reliability and value.

Standards and duties for Editorial Board members

• Control of the ethical standards: Editorial Board members of the journal “Studia Iuridica ” ensure that the standards and rules of ethical behaviour are applied. They counteract any practices contrary to the adopted standards.
• Fair play: Manuscripts are evaluated without regard to race, gender, religious belief, origin, citizenship or political philosophy of the author. The evaluation is done only for their intellectual content.
• Publication decisions criteria: The Publisher is responsible for deciding which manuscripts should be published. When receiving manuscripts for publication, the following factors are considered: scientific value of the work, originality of the approach to the topic, transparency, and compliance with the thematic scope of the journal.
• Confidentiality: Editorial Board members do not disclose any information on submitted manuscripts to any unauthorized person. The persons authorized to access such information are: the author, assigned reviewers, Editorial Board members, editors, and the Publisher.
• Avoiding competing interests: Unpublished manuscripts cannot be used by Editorial Board members nor by any other person involved in the publication process without the authors’ written consent.
• Scientific reliability: Editorial Board members safeguard scientific reliability of the publications. To this end, they may appropriately correct and change submitted manuscripts. In case of a suspected misconduct (plagiarism, research data falsification), they are obliged to reject the article in question.
• If such a case occurs, the Editorial Board is obliged to publish appropriate rectifications, explanations or apologies. 
• Article removal: The Editorial Board is entitled to remove an article after its publication, if:

- there is evidence that research results are not reliable and/or the data is falsified, as well as in case of unintentional errors (for example miscalculations or methodological errors);

- the research results have already been published;

- the work is plagiarized or it contravenes the ethical publication standards.

A notification on article removal shall be understood as a removal of the article. The notification should include information on the author (there should be at least the article title and the author(s)’(s) name(s) indicated) and the reasons for the removal. A distinction should be made between unintentional errors and deliberate misconduct which may constitute a cause for the article removal. Removed articles are not removed from the published version of the journal, their removal should be, however, clearly marked.

Standards for Authors

• Scientific reliability: Article authors are obliged to present an account of the research performed and an objective discussion of its results. Articles should contain sufficient information in order to identify the sources used, as well as to permit others to replicate the research. Presenting and interpreting data and research results that is not compliant with the ethical publication standards is unacceptable and may result in the article removal.
• Originality of the paper: Authors may submit only their own, original works. The research and/or data of other scholars used in the work should be appropriately and clearly cited or quoted. Plagiarism or data fabrication is unacceptable.
• Data access: Authors may be asked to provide the research data which is not cited in the text. They are obliged to provide access to such data, also after publication.
• Avoiding authors’ competing interests: Authors should not publish texts presenting the same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscripts to more than one journal constitutes unethical behaviour.
• Authorship of the paper:

- Authors submitting a manuscript by several authors are obliged to disclose contribution made by particular authors (including their affiliation address and the level of the contribution, i.e. information on the authors of the concept, assumptions, methods, protocols, etc. used during the preparation of the manuscript).

- Ghostwriting and guest authorship are treated as scientific misconduct; all detected cases shall be disclosed and a notification shall be sent to relevant institutions, such as institutions employing the authors, scientific societies, associations of scientific editors, etc.

- Authors submitting a manuscript are obliged to ensure that all those who have made contributions agree on the final form of the manuscript.

• Source reliability: Authors are obliged to cite in an attached reference list all publications which have been used when preparing the article.
• Errors in the paper: Should (an) author(s) discover any significant errors or inaccuracies in their paper, they are obliged to notify the Editorial Board immediately in order to withdraw the paper or correct the errors.

Standards for reviewers

Reviewers review manuscripts under the Editorial Board’s instructions. Their activity may, therefore, affect Editorial Board members’ decisions. Reviewers may also assist in establishing the final form of the paper and improving publications through communications with the authors.

• Deadlines: Reviewers are obliged to submit reviews on a determined date. If, for any reason (due to the topic of the manuscript, lack of time, etc.), they are unable to comply with the time limit or carry out the review, they should notify the Editorial Board immediately.
• Confidentiality: All reviewed manuscripts and their reviews are treated as confidential documents. Sharing manuscripts with a third party is unacceptable (with the exception of those who take part in the publication process).
• Objectivity standards: Reviews should be objective. Personal criticism of the authors is deemed at least inappropriate. All comments should be expressed with appropriate arguments.
• Source reliability: If such a case occurs, reviewers should mark particular works on the topic of the article which have not been cited by the author. The reviewer should mark all significant similarities between the article and other works, and notify the Editorial Board.
• Avoiding competing interests: Reviewers cannot use the manuscripts they review for their own needs or benefits. They should not assess manuscripts where they have potential conflicts of interest with the author(s). Reviewers should inform the Editorial Board about any possible conflicts of interests immediately and the final decision on resolving the matter is vested with the Editorial Board.
• Selection of reviewers: The Editorial Board is responsible for procuring reviews and selecting reviewers. Their identity is confidential and known only to the Editorial Board. Reviewers shall not be from the same institution as an author. 

Conflicts of interests

All Authors must disclose any conflict of interest defined as a financial or personal relation with other individuals or organizations, activities or positions that can bias the submitted article. Such conflict includes but is not limited to the matters of familial kinship, employment, consulting services, honoraria, and funding. Conflict of interest also refers to any of the above-mentioned relations between Authors and the Journal’s Editors, Reviewers, and Publisher. Authors are advised to disclose any potential conflict of interest before submitting the manuscript or during the editorial procedure. The Journal will also acknowledge the post-publication disclosure. Reviewers are advised to disclose any potential conflict of interest when they agree to review a manuscript or, if not yet known, after the publication. If a concern about a conflict of interest is made, the manuscript will be assigned to a different Editor or Reviewer. In the case of an acknowledged conflict of interest, the review procedures and the editorial decisions will be made independently of the disclosed information, based solely on the quality of the manuscript.

Data sharing and reproducibility

The Journal encourages Authors to post their data in standard formats that can be accessed and re-used by others. The Journal follows the Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, and Reuse of digital assets (FAIR) principles. It supports data integrity and encourages Authors to share the data associated with their research and any other information that supports it. The Journal supports the TRUST principles for digital repositories and encourages Authors to place the data in one of the repositories listed in OpenDOAR. Authors should also follow institutional and, if applicable, the funding body’s guidelines when choosing the platform to share their data. Authors are also encouraged to cite the data in their manuscript or indicate how to access the data by providing the DOI or access number. 

Intellectual Property

All Authors are required to accept the licence agreement terms and conditions upon submission. By submitting the manuscript, the Author agrees that: i) the work is original, ii) it has not previously been published and is not currently under consideration for publication elsewhere, iii) all copyrighted material (e. g. block quotation or extracts) is properly acknowledged and the Author has obtained permission to use it.

The Journal is published in an Open Access model Creative Commons Atribution 4.0 (CC-BY) License, which allows for redistribution, reuse, and adaptation with attribution to the Authors.

While the copyright to the text remains with the author(s), they grant the publisher a license to use the article.

Post-Publication

The Journal supports post-publication debates regarding the published articles. Readers can submit their concerns, opinions, criticism, or letters of support to the Editorial Board via its e-mail. The Journal has the right to peer review the criticism, to respond to criticism, and to publish the discussion, which may include an addendum (significant information disclosed after the publication that enhances the readers’ understanding of the article), Editor’s note, editorial expression of concern, correction, retraction, corrigendum. In any case, the COPE guidelines will be followed

If an Author notices a mistake after the article has already been published, they are requested to contact the Editorial Board. Depending on the nature of the error, the Editorial Board will investigate the case and decide whether an erratum or corrigendum needs to be published in cases of substantial errors only. 

The Journal follows the COPE guidelines with regard to the retraction process. 

Advertising

The Journal does not accept publication of any advertising material. In-house advertising might appear on the Journal web site and within the Journal. Advertisements are not related in any way to the editorial decisions.

Complaints

Any complaints relating to the activity of the journal, editors, reviewers, as well as any research misconduct (including, but not limited to plagiarism, citation manipulation, data falsification/fabrication) will be considered by the Editorial Board, after giving a person to whom a complaint pertains a possibility to respond. Complaints shall be submitted electronically to the Board's e-mail: studiaiuridica@wpia.uw.edu.pl Any allegations concerning research misconduct will be addressed according to COPE's guidelines.