ISSN 2522-9400 (Online)
Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
The Editorial Board of European Modern Studies Journal in its work endorses policy of Elsevier publishing house (Publishing Ethics) aimed at providing the highest standards of publishing ethics and follows the guidelines on ethics of research publication (Committee on Publication Ethics, COPE). Adherence to the regulations on publication ethics by all of involved in publication process provides protection of authors’ intellectual property right, credibility of a journal in the eyes of international scientific community and excludes the possibility of illegal use of author’s materials for benefits of particular persons.
In addition it is expected of editors, authors, and reviewers that they follow the best-practice guidelines on ethical behaviour contained therein.
Duties of Editors
Publication decisions. The editorial board is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editorial board will be guided by the policies of the journal and constrained by legal requirements related to libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. Members of the editorial board will confer and refer to reviewers recommendations in making this decision.
Equality. An editor, member of the editorial board or reviewer must evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, political philosophy, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, or religious belief of the authors.
Confidentiality. The editorial board guarantees confidentiality, that is, it undertakes not to disclose information about the given manuscript to anyone other than the respective authors, reviewers, other editorial consultants and, if necessary, the publisher.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's, reviewer’s or any other reader’s own research without the express written consent of the author.
Duties of Reviewers
Contribution to editorial decisions. Reviewers assist the editorial board in making editorial decisions and may also serve the authors in improving their manuscripts.
Qualification of reviewers. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse themselves from the review process. The editorial board is responsible for ensuring the promptness of responses.
Confidentiality. Any manuscripts received for review are confidential documents and must be treated as such; they must not be shown to or discussed with others except if authorised by the Editor-in-Chief (who will only do so under exceptional and specific circumstances).
Establishing standards of objectivity through critical discussion. Reviews should be conducted objectively. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments in the spirit of enhancing the quality of the paper through the mutual rational controls of critical discussion.
Acknowledgement of sources. Reviewers should identify relevant published works that have not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published data of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and conflict of interest. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the manuscripts.
Duties of Authors
Reporting standards. Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
Originality and plagiarism. The editorial board recognizes different cultural beliefs about the acceptability of quoting the ideas of others as if they were one’s own, and authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
Authorship of the paper. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest. All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication. Authors should not, in general, publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Parallel submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
Fundamental errors in published works. When an author or reader discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in the published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor and work with the editor to retract or correct the paper.