- Editor is responsible for deciding which articles submitted to Issues in Ethnology and Anthropology will be published.
- Editor is guided by the policies of the Journal's Editorial Board, taking into account the quality of papers, their originality, relevance, and readability, and their accord with the aims and scopes of the journal.
- Editor is obliged to provide clear and transparent guidelines for Authors in preparing manuscripts for publishing. Instructions for Authors are available at journal's web site. Instructions for Authors are published in the first Issue of every Volume.
- Editor is obliged to provide clear and transparent guidelines for Peer Reviewers, to provide confidentiality of peer review and to protect Peer Reviewers' identity. Instructions for Reviewers are available at journal's web site. Instructions for Reviewers and List of Peer Reviewers for every year are published in the last Issue of every Volume.
- Editor and Editorial Board take into account legal requirements in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. Editor is due to react if there is any justified suspicion about ethical misconduct in both published and unpublished papers.
- Editor should respond to authors’ justified complaints if authors’ rights are violated in the process of submitting and publishing manuscripts.
- Editor must hold no conflict of interest with regard to the articles considered for publication. If Editor feels that there is likely to be a perception of a conflict of interest, the selection of reviewers and all decisions on the paper shall be made by the Editorial Board. Since the identity of the authors and reviewers is unknown to each other, the Editor is obliged to guarantee their anonymity.
- Author/s warrants that his/their manuscript is an original work that has not been published before and is not under consideration for publication elsewhere either in printed or electronic form.
- Authors warrant that all who have contributed significantly to the manuscript are indicated as authors.
- Authors warrant that the rights of third parties will not be violated, and that the publisher will not be held legally responsible should there be any claims for compensation.
- Authors are exclusively responsible for the contents of their submissions, the validity of the results and must make sure that they have permission from all involved parties to make the data public.
- Authors wishing to include figures, charts or text passages that have already been published elsewhere are required to obtain permission from the copyright holder(s) and to include evidence that such permission has been granted when submitting their papers. Any material received without such evidence will be assumed to originate from the authors.
- It is the responsibility of each author to ensure that papers submitted to Issues in Ethnology and Anthropology are written with ethical standards in mind and that they do not contain plagiarism. Authors affirm that the article contains no unfounded or unlawful statements and does not violate the rights of others.
- 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 Editor or publisher and cooperate with the Editor to retract or correct the paper.
Peer Review Process
Issues in Ethnology and Anthropology are a double-blind peer reviewed journal.
All submitted manuscripts are initially pre-reviewed by the Editorial Board, who reserves the right to accept or reject the manuscript. If the Editorial Board concludes that the manuscript is within the scope of the journal and meets the standards and requirements for publication, the Editor proceeds to send the manuscript to two peer reviewers recommended by the Editorial Board.
Reviewers are chosen based on their eminence and competence in the research area to which the submitted manuscripts are related. Reviewers are selected from the highest university teaching and research titles. The choice of reviewers is at the discretion of the Editor and the Editorial Board. The Journal list of reviewers is updated and expanded with new reviewers annually.
Reviewers must not have conflict of interest with respect to the authors. If such conflicts exist, the reviewers must report them to the Editor without delay. The reviewer that feels unqualified to review the research reported in the particular manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor.
Reviewers are obliged to send the review to the Editorial Board within three weeks upon receipt of the manuscript. Reviews must be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is deemed inappropriate. Reviewers are expected to express their views clearly, with supporting arguments. If there is any justified suspicion about plagiarism or ethical misconduct in the manuscript, the peer reviewer is obliged to inform the Editor about it.
Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviews are conducted in a standardized way by using the Peer Review Form, which is, along with Instructions for Reviewers, sent by the Editor to reviewers without revealing the author’s identity.
Reviewer must fill in data related to the manuscript (title, area of research, subject of analysis, adequacy of methodology and interpretation, quality of literature used).
In the Reviewer’s Conclusions section, the peer reviewer needs to check the category of the paper appropriate for the reviewed manuscript (original scientific article or review article), and proceed to check one of the three following options: Paper to be published as it is; Paper to be published with mandatory changes with relevant explanation; Paper should not be published with appropriate explanation.
In the next section, the peer reviewer is requested to fill in his/her name, surname, title, the full name of the institution where he/she is employed and the place and date of the peer reviewing. These data are confidential and stay with the Editorial Board, and are not sent to the author of the reviewed manuscript.
During the review process, reviewers act independently, and without insight into each other’s identities. In cases where the manuscript receives diverging reviews (a positive and a negative one), the Editor will assign an additional reviewer.
Authors that receive conditionally positive reviews are required to take into account the comments made by the reviewers, or if they do not wish to do so, they can withdraw their submissions and report their decision immediately to the Editor. Authors are required to send the amended manuscripts to the Journal within 15 days after they received the reviews. The final evaluation of the manuscripts related to the fulfillment of reviewers’ requests is made by the Editor and the Editorial Board.
Plagiarism, where someone assumes another's ideas, words, or other forms of creative expression as one's own, is a clear violation of scientific ethics. Plagiarism may also involve a violation of copyright law, punishable by legal action.
Plagiarism may constitute the following:
- Word for word, or almost word for word copying, or purposely paraphrasing portions of another author's work without clearly indicating the source or marking the copied fragment (for example, by using quotation marks);
- Copying figures or tables from someone else's paper without properly citing the source and/or without permission from the original author or the copyright holder.
Please note that all submissions are thoroughly checked for plagiarism. Any paper which shows obvious signs of plagiarism will be automatically rejected.
If an attempt at plagiarism is found in a paper after having been published in Issues of Ethnology and Anthropology, the author will be required to publish a written apology to the authors of the original paper, and further collaboration with the author of plagiarized papers will be terminated.
Manuscripts published in the Journal shall remain extant, exact and unaltered as long as it is possible. However, occasionally, circumstances may arise where a published manuscript will later have been retracted. The main reason for withdrawal or retraction is to correct the mistakes overseen in the period prior to publishing with the aim of preserving the integrity of science and not for the purpose of punishing the author.
Legal limitations of the publisher, copyright holder or author(s), infringements of professional ethical codes, such as multiple submissions, bogus claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data or the like require retraction of an article. Occasionally a retraction can be used to correct errors in submission or publication.
Standards for dealing with retractions have been developed by a number of library and scholarly bodies, and this practice has also been adopted by Issues in Ethnology and Anthropology. In the electronic version of the original article, a HTML link is made to the retraction note where it is clearly stated that the article has been retracted. The original article is retained unchanged; save for a watermark in the PDF indicating on each page that it is “RETRACTED.”
Publication Ethics Statement
The Journal Issues in Ethnology and Anthropology is the product of the joint efforts by the authors, journal editors and the peer reviewers. Therefore, it is of great importance to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior.
The ethics standard used by the Issues in Ethnology and Anthropology is based on the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
Procedures for Dealing with Unethical Behaviour
Anyone may inform the Editors and/or Editorial Board at any time of suspected unethical behavior or any type of misconduct by giving the necessary information/evidence to start an investigation.
Editor-in-Chief will consult with the Section Editors on decisions regarding the initiation of an investigation.
During an investigation, any evidence should be treated as strictly confidential and only made available to those strictly involved in investigating.
The accused will always be given the chance to respond to any charges made against them.
If it is judged at the end of the investigation that misconduct has occurred, then it will be classified as either minor or serious.
Minor misconduct will be dealt directly with those involved without involving any other parties, e.g.:
- Communicating to authors/reviewers whenever a minor issue involving misunderstanding or misapplication of academic standards has occurred.
- A warning letter to an author or reviewer regarding fairly minor misconduct.
The Editor-in-Chief, in consultation with the Section Editors, and, when appropriate, further consultation with a small group of experts should make any decision regarding the course of action to be taken using the evidence available. The possible outcomes are as follows (these can be used separately or jointly):
- Publication of a formal announcement or editorial describing the misconduct.
- Informing the author's (or reviewer's) head of department or employer of any misconduct by means of a formal letter.
- The formal, announced retraction of publications from the journal in accordance with the Retraction Policy.
- A ban on submissions from an individual for a defined period.
- Referring a case to a professional organization or legal authority for further investigation and action.
When dealing with unethical behaviour, the Editorial Board will rely on the guidelines and recommendations provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE): http://publicationethics.org/resources/.
The views expressed in the published works do not express the views of the Editors and Editorial Staff. The authors take legal and moral responsibility for the ideas expressed in the articles. Publisher shall have no liability in the event of issuance of any claims for damages. The Publisher will not be held legally responsible should there be any claims for compensation.