Publishing Ethics

Editor-in-chief, editorial board, and editorial staff of the “Slavery: Theory and Practice” journal are committed to following the guidelines and recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and take into account the valuable experience of reputable international journals and publishers.

Our journal publishes research papers, and we strongly believe that scientific credibility is our indispensable asset.

The editorial board of the “Slavery: Theory and Practice” (hereinafter – the journal) makes every effort to comply with the ethical standards adopted by the international scientific community to prevent any violations of these rules. This policy is a prerequisite for our effective participation in the development of an integrated system of knowledge.

Article assessment

All manuscripts are subject to peer review and are expected to meet standards of academic excellence. If approved by the editor, submissions will be considered by peer reviewers, whose identities will remain anonymous to the authors.

The team of the journal will occasionally seek advice outside standard peer review, for example, on submissions with serious ethical, security, biosecurity, or societal implications. We may consult experts and the academic editor before deciding on appropriate actions, including but not limited to recruiting reviewers with specific expertise, assessment by additional editors, and declining to further consider a submission.

Originality and plagiarism

Ethical standards for publication exist to ensure high-quality scientific publications, public trust in scientific findings, and that people receive credit for their ideas. It is important to avoid:

Data fabrication and falsification:

Data fabrication means that the researcher did not actually perform the study but instead made up data. Data falsification means that the researcher did the experiment, but then changed some of the data. Both of these practices make people distrust scientists. If the public is mistrustful of science, then it will be less willing to provide funding support.

Plagiarism:

Taking the ideas and work of others without giving them credit is unfair and dishonest. Copying even from one sentence from someone else’s manuscript, or even one of your own that has previously been published, without proper citation is considered plagiarism — use your own words instead.

Multiple submissions:

It is unethical to submit the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time. Doing this wastes the time of editors and peer reviewers, and can damage the reputation of journals if published in more than one.

Redundant publications (or ‘salami’ publications):

This means publishing many very similar manuscripts based on the same experiment. It can make readers less likely to pay attention to your manuscripts.

Improper author contribution or attribution:

All of the listed authors must have made a significant scientific contribution to the research in the manuscript and have approved all its claims. Do not forget to list everyone who made a significant scientific contribution, including students and laboratory technicians.

Authors of the journal must not use the words, figures, or ideas of others without attribution. All sources must be cited at the point they are used, and reuse of wording must be limited and be attributed or quoted in the text.

Manuscripts that are found to have been plagiarized from a manuscript by other authors, whether published or unpublished, will be rejected and the authors may incur sanctions. Any published articles may need to be corrected or retracted.

Responsibilities of Editor-in-Chief, Editorial Board, and Editorial Staff

The editorial staff organizes the evaluation of the manuscript, ensures proper confidentiality when working with materials submitted to the journal, identifies conflicts of interest and resolves ethical conflicts that arise.

When receiving materials (manuscripts), the editorial board monitors the authors' compliance with the rules for submitting manuscripts, including the presence of an abstract, keywords, and a bibliographic list.

The editorial board evaluates the manuscript for compliance with the subject of the journal and appoints reviewers with sufficient qualifications to assess the quality of the submitted materials. The number of reviewers is determined by the editorial board based on the analysis of the manuscript, if necessary, for example, in the case of a pronounced interdisciplinary orientation of the materials, the editorial board additionally attracts specialists from related scientific fields to evaluate the materials. When appointing reviewers, the editorial board proceeds from the need to ensure the absence of conflicts of interest and the conscientiousness of the review.

The editorial board organizes the examination of the submitted manuscript on the principle of one-sided blind review. Experts are given the opportunity to freely express motivated critical comments on the level and clarity of the presentation of the submitted material, its compliance with the profile of the journal, the novelty and reliability of the results. The recommendations of the reviewers are the basis for making a final decision on the publication of the article.

The decision on publication is made by the editorial board of the journal in accordance with the journal's policy, taking into account the current legislation in the field of copyright. The evaluation of the manuscript is made solely on the basis of its scientific content, regardless of the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnicity, citizenship and political views of the authors.

The editor, members of the editorial board and all editorial staff are not allowed to disclose information about the submitted works to anyone other than the relevant authors, reviewers, other editorial consultants and, if necessary, the publisher.

The editor, members of the editorial board and editorial staff are not allowed to use unpublished materials used in the submitted manuscript in their own research without the written consent of the author.

When submitting an ethical complaint about a submitted manuscript or published article, the editorial board takes reasonable response measures. Every report of the fact of unethical behavior is considered, even if it came years after the publication of the article. If the complaint is supported, the appropriate corrections, rebuttals, or apologies should be published.

Responsibilities of Authors

Authors submit the manuscript that represents the results of their own original research work. It is expected that all authors whose names appear on the submission have contributed sufficiently to the work and share collective responsibility for the results.

If the manuscript is co-authored, it is expected that the consent to submit the manuscript has been received explicitly from all co-authors at the initial stage of submission. If the correspondence regarding the manuscript is carried by one of the co-authors on behalf of all others, it is the responsibility of this person to ensure that all co-authors receive all information about their submission.

The journal expects that the manuscript has been prepared for the particular academic audience of this journal and has not been submitted to other journals for simultaneous consideration. Still, we recognize that authors have the right to submit their manuscript simultaneously elsewhere – if this has been done, however, we strongly request that the authors should inform the editorial office about this. If the author’s manuscript has been approved for publication by any of the journals where it has been submitted, the author must immediately withdraw the manuscript from all other journals. If this requirement is neglected by the author, their manuscript may be rejected by the journal at any stage. Even though our journal may accept for consideration a manuscript that has been submitted simultaneously for consideration to another journal, it will not publish or even approve for publication such a manuscript.

Authors may not submit for consideration manuscripts that have been published previously, in full or partly; manuscripts that represent the same results of the same research that have already led to a similar publication; manuscripts that are compiled from, or are an abridged form of, a more comprehensive book or monograph written by the author on the same subject; or manuscripts that represent a chapter or section of such a book or monograph. The journal expects that the authors may consider their manuscripts as a potential part of their future books or monographs, but not vice versa.

If the author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his published work, he must immediately notify the editor or publisher of the journal and provide them with assistance in eliminating or correcting the error. If the editor or publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains significant errors, the author is notified of this, and the author is obliged to immediately remove or correct these errors or provide the editorial board with proof of the correctness of the original article.

Authors have the right to withdraw their manuscript at any point when it is under consideration.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

The main task of the reviewer is an objective and prompt assessment of the correspondence of materials (manuscript) to the subject of the journal, scientific novelty and the level of results presented in the manuscript, the quality of preparation of materials and the formulation of recommendations for the publication of materials, their revision or rejection in compliance with the proper level of confidentiality, adherence to generally accepted standards of objectivity, ensuring non-disclosure of information and promptly informing about conflicts of interest.

The reviewer makes a significant contribution to the activities of the scientific journal. His peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and, through the collaboration of the editor and the author, can help the author improve his work.

Peer reviewers should identify relevant published work in peer reviewed material that has not been properly mentioned or cited by the authors. The reviewer is also obliged to draw the attention of the editor to any significant or partial similarity with any other work with which the reviewer is directly familiar.

The unpublished materials used in the submitted manuscript should not be used in the reviewer's own research without the written consent of the author. Non-public information or ideas obtained during peer review must remain confidential and not be used for personal gain.