Publication Ethics

Publication ethical standards

The editorial team of “Nauki o Wychowaniu. Studia Interdyscyplinarne” (NOWIS) ensures the highest ethical standards at every stage of the editorial process. Since 2019, NOWIS has been a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and strictly adheres to the principles set forth by this organization. The review process is conducted in a double-blind format, with each article being evaluated by at least two reviewers.

More detailed information is presented below and on the journal’s website in the sections: Ethical standards; For authors; Home.

 

Editorial procedure / Circulation of documents

Manuscripts submitted to NOWIS are accepted through the ICI Publishers Panel.

The Editorial Secretary receives manuscripts along with additional documents (author’s declaration, metadata, author’s bio, other documents such as research funding information, acknowledgments, etc.) via the publication panel and promptly forwards them to the Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board for review. The Editor-in-Chief, in consultation with the Editorial Board, reviews the documents to assess whether there are any circumstances that violate ethical standards or other grounds that may necessitate the rejection of the manuscript from further consideration.

The Editorial Board, under the direction of the Editor-in-Chief and in consultation with the scientific editor(s), decides whether to proceed with the editorial process or reject the manuscript. For each manuscript, the Editorial Board proposes two reviewers.

The Editorial Secretary sends requests for reviews, collects submitted reviews, and keeps the Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board informed about the progress of the review process. Simultaneously, the article is checked using the Crossref Similarity Check plagiarism detection system, and an anti-plagiarism report is prepared for the Editorial Board.

 

Once the complete set of reviews is received, the Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board review them. If two negative reviews are received, the manuscript is rejected. In the case of one positive and one negative review, a third reviewer is appointed.

The Editorial Secretary forwards the reviewers’ comments to the author, and after receiving the revised manuscript along with the author’s response to the reviews, the Editor-in-Chief, the Editorial Board, and the scientific editor(s) of the respective issue assess whether the reviewer’s comments have been adequately addressed by the author. Based on this assessment, a decision is made regarding the next steps for the article (whether it requires a second review or can be sent for editorial preparation).

The Editorial Secretary collects the accepted, final versions of the articles, in accordance with the scientific editor(s) and the Editor-in-Chief, prepares the final table of contents, and finally – after it is accepted by the Editor-in-Chief – forwards the entire issue of the journal to editorial preparation and typesetting. After typesetting and subsequent corrections, the article is sent for authorization.

The Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Secretary ensure the timely submission of the new issue to the Publisher, who then places it in reference and indexing databases.

Rules for Authors

  1. Authors submitting original articles for publication in NOWIS are required to provide a thorough description and interpretation of the presented research, as well as to clarify their significance for disciplines related to broadly understood educational sciences. Lack of diligence in presenting and interpreting research results may result in the rejection of the manuscript.
  2. In NOWIS, original scientific texts are published, which authors confirm by submitting a declaration on the ICI platform. Therefore, authors are required to submit original content. In the case of using other works/research, it is essential to use appropriate markings indicating citations.
  3. Authors are required to adhere to the principle of not publishing the same work (articles) in more than one journal.
  4. Authors submitting articles to the journal are required to acknowledge other works that have influenced the nature of the submitted manuscript and to cite these publications as well.
  5. It is recommended to limit the list of authors or co-authors to those who have made a significant contribution to the creation of the project, idea, planning, execution, and interpretation of the results in the submitted work. Other individuals involved in various stages of the research project should be acknowledged in the acknowledgments section.
  6. All co-authors are required to read and approve the final version of the article and to express their consent for its submission for publication in NOWIS in the form of a co-author statement.
  7. Plagiarism or data fabrication is unacceptable and will result in the rejection of the manuscript.
  8. Authors submitting a manuscript for publication in NOWIS are required to disclose any financial or other significant (commercial, legal, professional) conflicts of interest that may affect the results of the presented research or their interpretation. All sources of financial support for the project must be reported in the submission.
  9. If the authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their articles, they are obliged to promptly inform the Editorial Board of NOWIS, which collaborates with the Scientific Council of the journal, in order to withdraw the article or correct the errors that occurred during the editorial process.
  10. In the case of publishing research results in which personal data were collected, it is required to obtain a positive opinion from the ethics committee at the author’s affiliated institution. Authors should provide the Editorial Board with confirmation that the research was conducted with the consent of the participants and that the data were obtained in accordance with the General Data Protection Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and Council of April 27, 2016 (GDPR)).
  11. In the case of publishing images of individuals who are not widely known (performing public functions), it is necessary to obtain their consent, or that of their legal guardians in the case of minors, for the dissemination of their image and the processing of personal data (information obligation under GDPR).
  12. The submitted article must not violate the rights of third parties, particularly other copyright rights, and all necessary permissions for the use of copyrighted materials must have been obtained by the author and submitted to the Editorial Board. Materials (e.g. photographs) should be described even if they come from open resources; it is required to specify the type of copyright – CC BY; indicate the source – link; and provide the names of the author(s).
  13. Authors may be asked by the Editorial Board to provide unprocessed research results; therefore, they should be prepared to ensure access to the specified data within six months of the publication of the issue.

Rules for the Editorial Board

  1. The Editorial Board of NOWIS, guided by the principle of responsibility, makes the decision to accept the article for publication. This occurs at the request of the Editor-in-Chief and in consultation with the editor(s) of the issue.
  2. The Editorial Board of NOWIS ensures the consistency of the published materials and allows for corrections to be made when necessary.
  3. The Editorial Board of NOWIS evaluates manuscripts based solely on formal and substantive criteria.
  4. The Editorial Board adheres to the principle of confidentiality. Any information regarding the submitted manuscript cannot be disclosed to anyone outside the Editorial Board and the editors of the issue. Authors and reviewers are provided with only the information necessary for the proper conduct of the review/editorial process.
  5. Unpublished materials contained in the submitted manuscript cannot be used by the editors in their own research without the explicit written consent of the author(s).
  6. Confidential information or ideas obtained as a result of the review process must be treated as confidential and cannot be used for personal gain by members of the editorial team.
  7. The editors of NOWIS strive to ensure a fair and appropriate review process.
  8. An editor of NOWIS does not participate in the editorial process in the event of a conflict of interest arising from competitive relationships, collaborations, or other connections with the authors or institutions associated with the submitted article.
  9. Revenues from advertisements, reprints, or other commercial benefits do not influence the Editorial Board’s decisions regarding the publication of articles.
  10. The Editorial Board of NOWIS encourages all interested parties to submit comments and opinions regarding published materials. Individuals submitting comments are asked to assist the editorial team in registering and documenting claims (e.g. data manipulation or fabrication, recycling of text, plagiarism, misconduct in research). Notifications should include: detailed information about the case (who, what, when, where, why); in the case of plagiarism and recycling of text, specifics about the relevant texts/articles should be provided.
  11. In the case of complaints regarding violations of ethical standards in submitted works or articles published in NOWIS, the editor should take appropriate remedial measures. When considering the retraction of an article or the publication of a correction or erratum, the editorial team adheres to the COPE guidelines for article retraction.
  12. If a conflict of interest is discovered after the publication of an article, the editorial team should disclose all relevant information and take appropriate action by publishing corrections and necessary amendments.
  13. The Editorial Board investigates and takes appropriate actions as outlined by COPE in every case of suspicion or presumption of ethical breaches in research and publications, as well as in cases of suspected violations of ethical standards in the editorial and peer review processes.
  14. The editor informs the other members of the editorial team about ethical concerns regarding the texts submitted for publication. In such situations, the editor is required to request the author to provide appropriate certifications and documents. If the response is satisfactory, the publishing process can be resumed; however, if there is no response or if there are any further reservations, the processing of the article is suspended, and the case of ethical standards violation is reported to COPE and/or the individuals responsible for overseeing the research at the appropriate institution that granted approval for it. If the matter is not resolved within three months, it should be reported to further institutions (e.g. the medical research registry, ethics committee, disciplinary officer at the institution where the author is affiliated).
  15. Members of the NOWIS Editorial Board who are authors and/or co-authors of a scientific article submitted for publication are excluded from coordinating the process of its internal and external review.

Rules for Reviewers

The reviewing process in NOWIS follows the double-blind review system. At least two independent reviewers are selected for each submitted article.

  1. Reviewers of articles collaborate with the editorial team and, through communication conducted during the review process, can influence the final shape of the published works.
  2. If researchers invited to review an article are unable to meet the deadline or undertake the review for substantive reasons, they should promptly inform the editorial team to facilitate the swift invitation of another reviewer.
  3. Reviewers are obligated to treat all articles submitted for evaluation as confidential materials. Sharing them with third parties is unacceptable (except for individuals authorized by the editorial team of NOWIS).
  4. Reviews should be objective in nature. Personal remarks regarding the authors are not permitted. All observations and recommendations made by the reviewer should be substantiated with factual arguments.
  5. Reviewers should indicate publications that have significantly influenced the state of research in the selected subject area but were not cited by the author of the evaluated text. If the text contains formulations, observations, and conclusions similar to those found in other works, the reviewer should provide the bibliographic references for those sources.
  6. Reviewers should note in their evaluation any significant similarities to other works and assess whether elements of another author’s work have been used in the article. The reviewer is obligated to inform the NOWIS Editorial Board about the possibility of plagiarism.
  7. Confidential information or ideas obtained during the review process must be treated as confidential and cannot be used for the personal benefit of the reviewer.
  8. The reviewer should withdraw from the review process in the event of a conflict of interest arising from competitive relationships, collaboration, or other connections with the presumed (due to the double-blind review type) authors or institutions associated with the submitted article.

Rules for the Publisher

The University of Lodz Publishing House is obligated to document and archive published articles/issues and provide the editorial team with all relevant information regarding complaints directed at NOWIS, the Editorial Board, the Scientific Council of the journal, as well as the Publishing House itself. The Publisher is also required to inform COPE about any breaches of publication ethics standards and other ethical principles applicable at the University of Lodz.

Source:

https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.2.26