PUBLICATION ETHICS

Humanistic Education

Editors and authors are required to comply with and promote fairness in their research and publications in accordance with the ethics of COMMITTEE ON PUBLICATION ETHICS (COPE) publications.
In order to ensure the highest standards of reliability and credibility of scientific work, the editors of the scientific journal Humanistic Education in accordance with the recommendations of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Republic of Poland have taken steps to eliminate in its pages the phenomena of ghostwriting and guestauthorship.
The scientific quarterly journal Humanistic Education has the character of open access. All published articles will be available immediately and permanently for reading and downloading by all interested parties.

Authors’ Rights and Obligations:

  • Articles are published on condition that the authors agree to transfer all copyrights to the scientific journal Humanistic Education
  • Authors agree to distribute articles in an open access system.
  • The author of the article guarantees the full originality of his work. The use of other people’s works or parts of them must be marked as a quote.
  • Submitted articles may not be published in other journals in whole or in a significant part. Authors should declare that all work in their submitted piece is original, and cite content from other sources appropriately to avoid plagiarism.
  • Authors should ensure that their manuscript as submitted is not under consideration (or accepted for publication) elsewhere.
  • Where sections of the manuscript overlap with published or submitted content, this should be acknowledged and cited.
  • The author must disclose all sources that may have influenced the final content of the publication; information obtained in private conversations, correspondence or discussions with third parties and in the performance of services, e. g. editorial work; the results of expert opinions or reports may not be used unless the author has obtained the express written consent of the author.
  • The results of the research as well as the course and manner of carrying out the analyses cannot be previously published in other journals or sent to their editorial offices.
  • Authors must ensure their contribution does not contain any defamatory matter or infringe any copyright or other intellectual property rights or any other rights of any third party.
  • The author may be asked by the editorial staff to make available the raw results of the research on the basis of which the analysis and conclusions were made in the submitted article.
  • If the author discovers an error in an article, they must immediately notify the editors and the publisher of the article with a view to making any necessary corrections or withdrawing the article from the print.
  • The authors’ team should be limited to persons who have made a significant contribution to the creation (concept, design, execution or interpretation of research results) of the article. All contributors should be listed as co-authors. It is unacceptable to add to the group of co-authors persons not participating in the creation of the study. The author should ensure that all co-authors approve the final version of the article.
  • The editorial office requires the author(s) of the article to submit a statement on compliance with the ethics of the publication with disclosure of all persons involved in the creation of the article.
  • Only the editors of the scientific journal Humanistic Education shall make a decision concerning the publication of the article.
  • The author should disclose all sources of financing concerning the project, its course, development, interpretation and publication of research results.
  • The publisher must respect the intellectual property rights – copyright and related rights.
  • The publisher should evaluate the articles on their merits regardless of race, nationality, gender, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, sexual orientation or political opinion of the author.
  • The publisher may not disclose information about the submitted works to anyone other than the author of the study, reviewers and editorial consultants.
  • The information described in the submitted work concerning the design, course, preparation and interpretation of research results may not be used by editors or reviewers for their own research without the explicit and unambiguous consent of the author.
  • The editorial staff ensures contact with the author of the article in order to solve conflict situations related to the manuscript sent in. Authors should declare any potential conflicts of interest relating to a specific article.
  • In order to avoid unconscious bias, the Editorial Office provides double-blind review – the author does not know the identity of the reviewer, and the reviewer does not know the identity of the author.
  • Authors have the right to appeal editorial decisions.

Rights and obligations of the reviewer:

  • Before accepting or rejecting a review request, a potential reviewer should consider the following issues:
  • Does the article correspond to the scientific field and scientific interests of the reviewer? The editors kindly ask the reviewers to accept the best quality research papers.
  • Is there a conflict of interest? If so, please notify the Editorial Office immediately.
  • Is a reviewer able to perform a review on a specific date?
  • In order to ensure the shortest possible time needed to inform the author of the article about the results of the review, please send us the information about whether the invitation to review was accepted or rejected as soon as possible.

 Rights and obligations of reviewers:

  • The evaluation of the article by reviewers is not affected by conflicts of interest related to competition, cooperation with other authors or institutions or companies of the author of the publication.
  • Reviewers of articles are obliged to promptly evaluate the materials received (up to 14 days); if they know that this is not possible, they should inform the Editorial Board about it.
  • Reviewers shall assess the article only on its merits, justifying its arguments and being fully objective.
  • Reviewers should identify relevant publications that the author has not quoted in the article. Any advice or recommendation that has been identified in the review or guiding a comment should be followed by the author.
  • In order to prevent plagiarism, reviewers are required to inform the Editorial Board immediately of any similarities or overlaps between the manuscript and other published known works, giving as much detail as possible. For more information, please visit the COPE website.
  • According to COPE guidelines, reviewers must treat any manuscript they wish to review as confidential.
  • A review is confidential, so it is not allowed to share it or the information contained therein without the consent of the Editor and the authors. This applies both to the publication process and afterwards.
  • Unpublished materials may not be treated as a review of own research, nor may they be used by a reviewer in any way without the express consent of their author.

Reviewers shall pay particular attention to the following criteria, such as:

  • compatibility of the title of the article with its content,
  • compliance of the article with the issues of the journal,
  • the usefulness of the research undertaken for science,
  • timeliness and originality of the issues raised,
  • the substantive value of the text,
  • the quality of the research,
  • meeting editorial requirements,
  • the nature of the article (scientific, communication, report, review, etc.),
  • the structure of the content,
  • language and terminology,
  • comprehensibility and legibility of diagrams, tables and drawings,
  • timeliness and proper selection of bibliographies/references.
  • The reviewer’s recommendation may adopt one of the conclusions:
  • the article without comments; may be published in its entirety,
  • the article requires minor changes and may be published afterwards,
  • the article requires significant corrections and should be reviewed before publication,
  • the article is not suitable for publication.