Code of Ethics for Publishing Articles in the Scientific Journal:
STUDIA SCIENTIFICA FACULTATIS PAEDAGOGICAE
The publication process in the journal STUDIA SCIENTIFICA FACULTATIS PAEDAGOGICAE follows the standards for publication ethics of the scientific board of the EU companies Elsevier and COPE/Committee on Publication Ethics.
Duties of Authors According to the Code of Ethics
The authors submitting articles to STUDIA SCIENTIFICA FACULTATIS PAEDAGOGICAE declare that their manuscripts are entirely original works. The following duties listed for authors, editors, reviewers and the publisher are binding for them and they must adhere to the principles of the journal STUDIA SCIENTIFICA FACULTATIS PAEDAGOGICAE.
Standard for Manuscripts, Access to Data and Their Retention
The authors of articles are obliged to use objective reasoning and objective results of their scientific research. The data base of a scientific research should be explicitly presented. Scientific studies must be sufficiently detailed and the references used must enable readers to reproduce their work objectively.
The authors of the articles may be asked to provide source data used in the studies and articles for editorial control purposes, and if it is possible, the author should retain the used data for a reasonably long period after the publication.
Misleading or intentionally incorrect statements are considered unethical.
Originality and Plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical behaviour and is unacceptable. Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others.
Multiple, Redundant and Concurrent Publication
An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical behaviour and is unacceptable.
Authors should cite publications that have significantly influenced the submitted article.
The article should always contain correct and full quotation of another’s paper. Information obtained privately must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source, or from the owner of the property rights.
Authorship of the Article
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the final conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study, article or paper. All those who have made substantial contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the paper, they should be recognised in the article. The corresponding (responsible) author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Fundamental Errors in the Published Works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper if deemed necessary by the editor. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains an error, it is the obligation of the author to cooperate with the editor, including providing evidence of accuracy of the original results to the editor when requested.
Duties of Editors According to the Code of Ethics
Publication decision: Editor in Chief of STUDIA SCIENTIFICA FACULTATIS PAEDAGOGICAE may accept, reject or request corrections of the articles reported to the journal for publication.
In case both reviews are positive, the text is accepted to be published with the approval of editorial board. If both reviews are negative, the text is rejected. If one of the reviews is positive and the other negative, the author is invited by the editor in chief to edit the article. Subsequently, the article will be reconsidered. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted article must not be used in anyone’s own research without the express written consent of the author.
Accepting articles into individual issues of the scientific journal STUDIA SCIENTIFICA FACULTATIS PAEDAGOGICAE is in the competence of editorial board of the journal which takes into account the reviews and other material acquired from the managing editor. The validation of the article in question and its importance to researchers and readers must be realized in accordance with the editorial rules. The managing editor is thus subject to legal requirements in case of libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The managing editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making these decisions. The managing editor works with the manuscripts solely from the perspective of their content and quality.
The editor in chief or anyone in the editorial office of the scientific journal STUDIA SCIENTIFICA FACULTATIS PAEDAGOGICAE must not provide any information about submitted manuscripts to any subjects other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, members of the editorial board and publisher.
Participation and Cooperation on Handling Complaints
The editorial office shall take specific measures in case of complaints of ethical character regarding the submitted or published manuscript. These measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration to the respective complaint or claims made. The measures further include communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies and if the complaint proves to be justified, correction will be published, or the article will be retracted, or other correction will be implemented. Each reported case of unethical behaviour in publishing in the journal must be investigated, even in the case that the article has been published long time ago.
Duties of Reviewers According to the Code of Ethics
STUDIA SCIENTIFICA FACULTATIS PAEDAGOGICAE is double-blind peer-reviewed journal.
Promptness: The accepted texts will be provided to two reviewers who are professionals in the given area and come from other workplaces than the author of the text. If the reviewer is not able to finish the review of the manuscript within the agreed deadline, he/she must communicate with the editor so that the manuscript will be provided to another reviewer.
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Reviewer helps the editor and editorial board of the scientific journal STUDIA SCIENTIFICA FACULTATIS PAEDAGOGICAE with editorial decisions about publishing/rejecting articles. Reviewer’s comments assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication.
Further Aspects/Time Perspective of Review Procedure
Each suggested reviewer who does not feel qualified to review a certain manuscript, or who knows that he/she will not be able to make the review within the agreed deadline, should notify the redaction office and excuse him/herself from the review process.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not show the manuscript or discuss the manuscript with anyone unless the redactor in chief of the journal STUDIA SCIENTIFICA FACULTATIS PAEDAGOGICAE permits it.
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Citation of Sources
Reviewers should point out the data and information that are incorrectly cited or not cited at all by the author. Any proclamation that the data or information were already published in the past must be supported by relevant documentation. A reviewer should bring to the attention of the editor any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which the reviewer has personal knowledge.
Publishing and Competing Interests
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Substantial information or ideas obtained through peer review are considered confidential and must not be used for personal advantage of the reviewer. Reviewers should not review articles in which a conflict of interests resulting from competitive or other relations with the author may arise.
DUTIES OF THE PUBLISHER
The publisher defines the relationship between the publisher, editors and other contracting parties, respects confidentiality (e.g. towards the participants of a research, authors, professional reviewers), protects intellectual property and copyright, and also supports editorial independence.