Ethical principles

Academicon Publishing House has adopted and applies publication ethics principles aimed at preventing publication malpractice. These principles comply with the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), available at https://publicationethics.org/ (see also the Polish-language flowcharts).

Manuscripts submitted to the Publishing House are assessed for compliance with publication ethics principles and for their scholarly merit.

Principles applicable to the publisher

  • Monitoring ethical standards: The publisher continuously monitors compliance with applicable publishing standards and publication ethics principles and prevents practices inconsistent with these standards.

  • Non-discrimination: Authors’ race, gender, religion, origin, citizenship or political beliefs have no bearing on the assessment of their manuscripts.

  • Assessment based on scholarly merit: The Publishing House evaluates manuscripts solely on their scholarly merit, drawing on reviewers’ opinions concerning the scholarly value of the work, the originality of its approach and the clarity of its argument.

  • Confidentiality: The publisher does not disclose any information concerning works submitted for publication to unauthorised persons. Those authorised to access this information include the author, designated reviewers, editors and other persons involved in the publishing process.

  • Preventing conflicts of interest: Unpublished manuscripts may not be used by employees of the Publishing House or any other persons involved in the publishing process without the authors’ written consent.

  • Retraction of a publication: The publisher has the right to retract a work after publication if:

    • there is evidence that the research findings are unreliable and/or that data have been falsified, or if unintentional errors have occurred, such as methodological or calculation errors;

    • the work shows evidence of plagiarism or violates publication ethics principles.

Principles applicable to the academic editor of an edited volume

  • Criteria for accepting contributions: The academic editor decides which contributions will be published. Acceptance of contributions to an edited volume is based on their scholarly value, the originality of their approach and the clarity of their argument.

  • Scholarly integrity: The academic editor ensures the scholarly integrity of published works and may introduce appropriate changes and corrections to maintain it. If malpractice is suspected, such as plagiarism or falsification of research findings, the editor is required to decide to withdraw the contribution from the edited volume.

  • Authorship: The academic editor submitting the volume to the publisher is responsible for ensuring that all contributors approve its form following academic editing.

  • Withdrawal of a contribution: The academic editor has the right to withdraw a contribution from publication if:

    • there is evidence that the research findings are unreliable and/or that data have been falsified, or if unintentional errors have occurred, such as calculation or methodological errors;

    • the work shows evidence of plagiarism or violates publication ethics principles.

Principles applicable to the author

  • Originality and integrity: Authors may submit only their own original manuscripts for publication. Research and/or information drawn from other scholars must be clearly acknowledged, with an indication of how it has been used, for example through quotation or paraphrase. Plagiarism and data falsification are unacceptable.

  • Data availability: Authors requested to provide the raw research data underlying their manuscripts are required to make those data available, including after publication.

  • Authorship:

    • Authors submitting jointly authored manuscripts must disclose each author’s contribution to the work, including their affiliations and information identifying who developed the concepts, assumptions, methods, protocols and other elements used in preparing the manuscript.

    • Ghostwriting and guest authorship constitute breaches of scholarly integrity. All detected cases should be exposed, including by notifying relevant bodies such as the authors’ employing institutions, learned societies and associations of academic editors.

  • Acknowledgement of sources: Authors are required to include in the bibliography all publications used in preparing the manuscript.

  • Reporting errors: If authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their work, they must promptly notify the publisher so that these can be corrected in the next edition or reprint.

Principles applicable to the reviewer

Reviewers assess works at the request of the Publishing House and thereby contribute to its publishing decisions. In consultation with the author, they may also help shape and improve the final version of the work.

  • Timeliness: Reviewers are required to submit their reviews by the agreed deadline. If, for any reason, such as concerns about their subject expertise or lack of time, they are unable to meet the deadline or undertake the review, they should promptly inform the publisher.

  • Confidentiality: All works under review and the corresponding reviews are confidential. Disclosing manuscripts and/or reviews to third parties is unacceptable, except to persons involved in the publishing process.

  • Objectivity: Reviews should be objective. Personal criticism of the author is considered, at the very least, inappropriate. All reviewers’ comments should be supported by appropriate reasoning.

  • Attention to sources: Where necessary, reviewers should identify relevant works that the author has not cited. Reviewers should identify and report to the publisher any significant similarities between the manuscript under review and other works.

  • Preventing reviewers’ conflicts of interest: Reviewers must not use the work under review for personal purposes or gain. They should not assess a manuscript if a conflict of interest involving the author may exist.