CODE OF ETHICS
FOR PUBLICATION IN STUDIA PHILOLOGICA
The code of ethics regulates the ethical standards to which all the participants in the publication process of STUDIA PHILOLOGICA (periodical of the Faculty of Modern Languages, St Cyril and St Methodius University of Veliko Tarnovo) should adhere. The editorial board adopts and adheres to the principles of the publication ethics adopted by the international academic communities and listed in the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines – COPE is a non-profit organization whose mission is to support the achievement of high ethical standards in academic publication.
Tasks of the Publisher (St. Cyril and St. Methodius University Press)
The publisher carries out the pre-press preparation of each volume of the periodical, along with the final editing and proofreading of the materials accepted for publication. The publisher also presents the material ready for publication to the authors giving them the possibility to make final corrections.
The publisher prepares two issues of STUDIA PHILOLOGICA – an electronic one and a paper one. Each of the authors and each member of the international editorial board receives a paper copy of the current volume.
The publisher helps the compilers of each volume consulting them on every problem during the working process. The publisher helps the editorial board in working on projects and in the process of indexing the volumes of the periodical in international databases.
STUDIA PHILOLOGICA is an open access periodical.
Tasks of the Editorial Board
The editorial board of STUDIA PHILOLOGICA takes decisions about the publication of the manuscripts based on their academic merits (originality, topicality, clarity of language, style, etc.), disregarding the authors’ sex, race, ethnic origin, political and religious beliefs, social and institutional affiliation. The editorial board adheres to the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics, COPE, Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
All manuscripts proposed for publication undergo a procedure of anonymous editing carried out by two editors, recognized experts in the area of research. If necessary, a manuscript may be reviewed by a third editor taking on the role of an arbitrator. The process of double-blind peer review guarantees the anonymity of the sides. A manuscript is accepted for publication on grounds of the opinion given by the reviewers concerning the quality of the paper. An important criterion for publication is the topic of the manuscript, which should match the theme declared by the current volume of the journal.
The editorial board should notify the author about the decision for publishing or not publishing the paper. Before the procedure of double-blind peer review, all papers are checked for plagiarism. Checking plagiarism is carried out according to the rules regulated by St Cyril and St Methodius University of Veliko Tarnovo.
The editorial board should not reveal to anyone any information regarding any of the manuscripts with the exception of those who are directly involved in the process of reviewing and publishing.
The editorial board should not use or give third parties access to any unpublished information from a manuscript without the written agreement of the authors. All information obtained during the work with the manuscript is considered confidential.
In case of wrongful behaviour, the editors can take actions like correction of the text, withdrawing of the paper, expressing an opinion, etc.
Tasks of the Reviewers
The double blind peer review guarantees the quality of the publication process. It helps the editorial board in the taking of decisions and can help to improve the quality of the manuscripts by the communication between the authors and the reviewers. The reviewers who evaluate the texts have no access to any information about the authors.
Should a researcher who has been invited to review a manuscript feel that s/he is not qualified enough to review a given manuscript or knows that s/he could not cope with finishing the review within the deadline, the reviewer should timely notify the editorial board about this and refuse to review the manuscript.
All manuscripts accepted for reviewing are confidential documents and should not be exposed to or discussed by others except by permission of the editorial board (except in individual and special circumstances).
The reviewing of the manuscripts should be based on objective criteria. All notes by reviewers should be stated clearly and should be accompanied by sufficient arguments so that the authors could use them to improve their manuscripts.
Unpublished materials that are mentioned in a given manuscript should not be used by a reviewer in her/his own research without the author’s firm written consent. The editors should not evaluate manuscripts in relation to which they have conflict of interests.
In all aspects of their work, reviewers should follow the guidelines published by Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE): Ethical guidelines for peer reviewers
Tasks of the Authors
In her/his proposal for publication, each author should present a precise description of the work offered along with an objective assessment of its contribution. The paper should contain a sufficient number of facts and citations of other sources, which can be checked and verified. Statements, which are deliberately incorrect or data, which are falsified are unacceptable and are considered an unethical form of behaviour.
If necessary, the editorial board could ask the authors to present original data related to their paper. The authors should be ready to ensure access to these data to other scholars and researchers after the publication of the paper provided that copyright and ownership of these data is guaranteed.
Authors should take part in the process of the blind peer review and be ready to answer questions on part of the editors related to the original data of their paper, provide explanations concerning the text or copyright.
Authors should take into account the comments and recommendations by the reviewers and should correct and sent again their manuscripts.
Authors should guarantee that their work is entirely original. Citing information from somebody else’s work should be acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms (presenting somebody else’s work and its results as one’s own, paraphrasing essential parts of another’s work without acknowledging the author, etc.) counts as an unethical publication behaviour and is unacceptable.
Authors should not propose for publication the same manuscript to more than one publisher at the same time.
The authors should timely provide information about their sources of financing, about all existing or potential conflicts of interests, consultations, fees paid, expert opinions, etc.
Should an author find any errors or inconsistencies in his/her own text, s/he should immediately inform the editorial board and should co-operate with them to make the necessary corrections or, if necessary, s/he should withdraw the article.
Publication in STUDIA PHILOLOGICA is free for all authors.
Assignment of Rights
Authors should provide copyright to the publisher.
Authors have the right to upload their publications from STUDIA PHILOLOGICA on other electronic platforms.