Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
Eger Journal of English Studies (EgerJES) is a double blind peer review international academic journal and stands for meeting the highest standards of publication ethics. It is necessary to agree upon standards of expected ethical behaviour for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the authors, the journal editors, the reviewers, and the publisher.
By submitting a manuscript to this journal, each author explicitly confirms that the manuscript meets the highest ethical standards for all authors and co-authors (if any). Our ethics and malpractice statements concerning the duties of parties involved in the act of publishing EgerJES are based on the Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors developed by COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics): http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines.
For Editors
Responsibilities and Principles
The editor of the journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editor should be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with the members of the editorial board or reviewers in making this decision.
Fair Play
An editor at any time will evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
Confidentiality
The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author.
For Reviewers
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Reviewers assist the editor in making editorial decisions and, through the editorial communications with the author, may also assist the author in improving their paper.
Any selected reviewer who has been invited to review a manuscript but feels either unqualified to do so or unable to complete the review within a reasonable timeframe, should immediately notify the editor so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.
Confidentiality
Any manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document. It must not be shown to or discussed with others, except as authorised by the editor.
Standards of Objectivity
Reviews of manuscripts submitted to EgerJES should be conducted objectively, according to academic standards. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable. Reviewers should express their views clearly, with appropriate supporting arguments. Reviewers should report their comments, suggestions, as well as the manuscript’s weak points, clearly and in detail in the designated text box of the EgerJES review form.
Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers should identify any relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement to the effect that an observation, conclusion, or argument has been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call the editor’s attention to 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
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. 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 connected to the papers.
For Authors
Reporting Standards
Authors of reports 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 paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate an empirical research project. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
Originality and Plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written an entirely original work, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, these should be appropriately cited or quoted.
Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
Acknowledgement of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
Authorship of the Paper
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. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
Proofs
After acceptance, a proof is sent to the corresponding author, who circulates it to all co-authors (if any) and deals with the journal on their behalf. EgerJES may not correct errors after publication if they result from errors that were present in a proof that was not shown to co-authors before publication. The corresponding author is the person responsible for the accuracy of all content in the proof in general, and in particular for listing each and every co-author, spelling their names correctly, and including their up-to-date affiliations.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
Fundamental Errors in Published Works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to withdraw or correct the paper. Any published correction requires the consent of all co-authors (if any).
Corresponding Author's Role in the Submission
The corresponding author is obliged to check that all authors have significantly contributed to the research reported in a manuscript submitted to EgerJES.
Corresponding Author's Role in the Peer Review Process
The corresponding author is obliged to participate in the peer review process and comply with the requirements made by the reviewers in order to have their article published in EgerJES.
Corresponding Author's Communication with the Editor
All communication between corresponding author and the editor is confidential. Authors must also treat communication with the journal as confidential. The author's correspondence with the journal, reviewers’ reports and other confidential material must not be posted on any website or otherwise publicly announced without prior permission from the editors. Once an article is published in EgerJES, it is the corresponding author’s responsibility to deal with fundamental errors (see relevant section above), if any.
Author Contribution Statement for Co-Authored Manuscripts
The author list should contain only those who can legitimately claim authorship. This is all those who:
- Have made a substantial contribution to the concept or design of the article; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the article; AND
- Drafted the article or revised it critically for important intellectual content; AND
- Approved the version to be published; AND
- Agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
