The ethics statements for Studia Oeconomica Posnaniensia listed below are based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
- Chief Editor is responsible for everything published in the journal. Both Chief Editor and Issue Editors have the right to reject an article both before and after the reviewing proces, based on legal, ethical, formal, and intellectual requirements. Especially, manuscripts might be rejected if they exceed plagiarism norms, are not formatted properly or bring no added value to current state of knowledge.
- Chief Editor and Issue Editor should evaluate submitted manuscripts without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the author(s).
- Information about the submitted manuscript should not be shared with anyone, unless it is required to proceed with the reviewing and publishing process. All the information will only be shared with the author(s), reviewers, potential reviewers, publisher, and in some instances, the editorial board members, as and when appropriate.
- Chief Editor will be guided by COPE’s Guidelines for Retracting Articles when considering retracting, issuing expressions of concern about, and issuing corrections pertaining to articles that have been published in SOEP.
- Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in anyone’s own research without the written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
- Chief Editor is committed to ensuring that any commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.
- Chief and Issue Editors should seek to ensure a fair and appropriate peer review process. Editors as well as Editorial Board members will not take part in the decision-making process concerning their own work or work in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions involved in article creation. Editors require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests, if applicable, and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If necessary, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern.
- Chief Editor should always be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when appropriate. Editor should also take reasonable and appropriate action when ethical complaints are presented concerning a manuscript submitted to SOEP.
- Peer review assists the Chief and Issue Editor in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communication with the author, may also assist the author in improving the manuscript.
- Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its timely review will be impossible should immediately notify the editor so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.
- Reviews should be conducted objectively. Referees should express their views clearly with appropriate supporting arguments.
- Reviewers should not consider evaluating 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 involved in the submission.
- Reviewers should identify any relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously mentioned 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.
- All information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Manuscripts must not be shown to or discussed with others except when authorized by the Editor.
- Authors reporting results 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 manuscript. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
- 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. Authors should also cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
- Authors should not 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.
- Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors and sign up an authors' contribution statement available on the journal's website. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be named in an acknowledgement section.
- The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors (according to the above definition) and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the author list of the manuscript and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
- If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the authors must clearly identify these in the manuscript. In case of research conducted on humans, a proper agreement from the local ethical comitee is desired.
- 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.
- When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal’s editor or publisher and cooperate with them to either retract the paper or to publish an appropriate erratum.
In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum or, in the most severe cases, the complete retraction of the work in question. In such cases the publisher and the editorial board will follow the COPE flowcharts to ensure highest publication standards.