Prilozi za istraživanje hrvatske filozofske baštine / Contributions to the Research of Croatian Philosophical Heritage

This publication ethics and publication malpractice statement is based on the Code of Conduct and Best-Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors (Committee on Publication Ethics, 2011).

Editor’s responsibilities

The Editor-in-chief will ensure that all submitted manuscripts, apart from book reviews and notes on conferences and symposia, being considered for publication undergo peer review by at least two reviewers who are expert in the field. Book reviews and notes on conferences and symposia will be reviewed by the Editor-in-chief.

The Editor-in-chief is responsible for deciding which of the papers submitted to the journal will be published. He or she will evaluate manuscripts without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.

The decision will be based on the paper’s importance, originality, clarity, and its relevance to the journal’s scope.

The Editor-in-chief and Managing Editor must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, and members of the Editorial Board.

The Editor-in-chief will proceed according to the COPE guidelines (https://content.ifzg.hr/poveznice/Ethical_codex_for_Editors-COPE-english.pdf) when dealing with the following cases:

• redundant (duplicate) publication,
• plagiarism,
• fabricated data,
• changes in autorship,
• ghost, guest or gift autorship,
• undisclosed conflict of interest in a submitted manuscript or published article,
• an ethical problem with a submitted manuscript,
• suspicion that a reviewer has appropriated the author’s idea or data.

Editorial Board’s responsibilities

The Editorial Board cooperates with the Editor-in-chief in the process of the selection of reviewers and in reaching the final verdict on the manuscript.

The Editorial Board must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone outside the Board.

Reviewers’ responsibilities

The peer-reviewing process assists the Editor-in-chief and the Editorial Board in making editorial decisions and serve the author in improving the paper. The reviewers suggest to the Editor-in-chief acceptance, rejection, or revision of the manuscript.

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-in-chief and withdraw from the review process.

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be disclosed to or discussed with others except as authorized by the Editor-in-chief.

Reviews should be conducted objectively and written clearly, with supporting arguments, so that they can help authors in improving the manuscript. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Reviewers should identify cases in which relevant published work referred to in the paper has not been cited. They should point out whether observations or arguments derived from other publications are accompanied by the respective source. Reviewers will notify the Editor-in-chief of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and conflict of interest

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 associated with the papers.

Authors’ responsibilities

Originality, plagiarism and acknowledgement of sources

Authors will submit only entirely original works, and will appropriately cite or quote the work and/or words of others. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work should also be cited.

Participation in the peer review process.

Authors are obliged to participate in the peer review process.

Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication

Submitting the same paper to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Manuscripts which have been published as copyrighted material elsewhere cannot be submitted. In addition, manuscripts under review by the journal should not be resubmitted to copyrighted publications. However, by submitting a manuscript, the author retains the rights to the published material. In case of publication they permit the use of their work under a CC-BY license, which allows others to copy, distribute and transmit the work as well as to adapt the work and to make commercial use of it.

Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his or her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the Editor-in-chief or publisher and to cooperate with them to retract or correct the paper in form of an erratum.

Publisher’s responsibilities

Handling of unethical publishing behaviour

In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the Editor-in-chief and the Editorial Board, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum, clarification or, in the most severe case, the retraction of the affected work.  The publisher, together with the editors, shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, and under no circumstances encourage such misconduct or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place.