Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

The journal publishes glosses and reviews of case law referring to the various areas of commercial law. The focal point of these publications is to analyze the intriguing and significant legal issues regarding the practical application of, in particular, commercial law, business law, tax law, banking law, law of public finances, as well as intellectual property law and unfair competition law. The journal is addressed primarily to practicing legal professionals, working for business entities, dealing with various problems in the field of taxes, real estate, transport, construction, company law, as well as civil law, unfair competition and intellectual property law.

 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

  1. The procedures of submitting manuscripts for publication, reviewing, publishing and proceeding after their publication are open and publicly available.
  2. The Editorial Board sends the submitted manuscripts for review, unless the text has been rejected by the Editorial Board.
  3. At least two reviewers are appointed to evaluate the submitted manuscript. The reviewers  are experts in the subject area or subject covered by the manuscript. They are appointed from outside the scientific unit affiliated with the author. In special cases, additional reviewers may be appointed.
  4. The reviewer is selected by the Editor-in-Chief in cooperation with the Managing Editor, in consultation with the members of the Editorial Board.
  5. The reviewer is appointed from among persons who guarantee impartiality, honesty and expertise in the field of the reviewed manuscript. The editors ensure that the review process is impartial, objective and fair.
  6. The Editorial Board ensures that reviewers comply with the principles of publishing ethics, including applying the principles expressed in How To Recognize Potential Manipulation of the Peer Review Process, (https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/recognising-peer-review-manipulation -cope-infographic.pdf). This applies in particular to preventing the reviewer from appropriating the ideas of the author of the reviewed manuscript. If such an event is suspected, the Editorial Board applies the guidelines contained in Reviewer Suspected To Have Appropriatedan Author's Ideas Or Data (https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/reviewer-misconduct-suspected-cope-flowchart.pdf).
  7. A member of the Editorial Board or a member of the Journal’s Scientific Council is not appointed to act as a reviewer. If the author of the submitted manuscript is a member of the Jorunal’s Scientific Council or a member of the Editorial Board, he/she is excluded from the reviewer selection process.
  8. If a member of the Editorial Board is suspected of having a conflict of interest, he/she is obliged to withdraw from the publication procedure. If a member of the Editorial Board submits a manuscript for the publication procedure, he/she excludes himself/herself from the publication procedure of this manuscript. He/she acts in the same way when a manuscript is submitted by a person staying in close relationship with him/her. This member of the Editorial Board does not have access to information and data in this publication procedure.
  9. Manuscripts submitted for the review process as well as information obtained in this process are confidential. It is unacceptable to disclose them to persons other than authorized ones.
  10. The reviewer comes from outside the entity to which the author of the submitted manuscript is affiliated or related.
  11. Authors and reviewers do not know each other's personal details. The Editorial Board mediates contacts between them.
  12. The content of the review is not public, it is disclosed only to the Editorial Board and, after anonymization, to the author/co-authors of the text.
  13. The content of the review is shared with the author without revealing the identity of the reviewer. The author is obliged to respond to the comments and conclusions made in the review.
  14. In the case of a review ending with positive conclusion if certain changes are introduced, Editorial Board accepts manuscript for publication if the author introduces changes indicated by the reviewer
  15. Only manuscripts that have received two positive reviews are submitted for publication. In the event of inconsistent reviews, the Editorial Board may decide to appoint an additional reviewer or reviewers.
  16. If the suspicions of manipulation carried out during the review process arise, Editorial Board follows the principles expressed in Peer Review Manipulation Suspected During The Peer Review Process, (https://publicationethics.org/files/peer-review-manipulation-during-review-cope- flowchart.pdf).
  17. If the suspicion of an undisclosed conflict of interest regarding an unpublished manuscript arise, the Editorial Board, following the procedure set out in Undisclosed Conflict of Interest in a Submitted Manuscript, (https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/conflict-of-interest-submitted-manuscript-article-cope-flowchart.pdf), carefully checks whether any applicable rules have been violated.
  18. If the suspicion of an undisclosed conflict of interest regarding a published scientific article arise, the Editorial Board, following the procedure set out in Undisclosed Conflict of Interest in a Published Article, (https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/conflict-of-interest-published-article-cope-flowchart-v2.pdf), carefully checks whether any applicable rules have been violated.
  19. Once a year, the Journal publishes a list of collaborating reviewers on its website, without indicating the reviewer of a specific manuscript.

 

Publication Frequency

Glosa - Prawo Gospodarcze w Orzeczeniach i Komentarzach is issued four times a year:

 

No 1 - scheduled date of issue: before the end of March

No 2 - scheduled date of issue: before the end of June

No 3 - scheduled date of issue: before the end of September

No 4 - scheduled date of issue: before the end of December

 

The Editorial Board may decide to release an additional special issue beyond the publishing schedule or a thematic issue as part of the regular publishing schedule.

 

Open Access Policy

Glosa - Prawo Gospodarcze w Orzeczeniach i Komentarzach is an open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the BOAI (Budapest Open Access Initiative) definition of open access. The articles are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY).

 

Ethical Standards of „Glosa: Prawo Gospodarcze w Orzeczeniach i Komentarzach"

General Rules

  1. The following rules are developed based on the standards of the Committee on Publication Ethics (hereinafter: COPE) and apply to procedures related to the functioning of and publishing in Glosa: Prawo Gospodarcze w Orzeczeniach w Komentarzach, (hereinafter: the Journal).
  2. The Editorial Board of the Journal (hereinafter: Editorial Board) declares the implementation of COPE principles and practices expressed in particular in:
    - Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing (https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/principles-transparency-best-practice-scholarly-publishing.pdf) and
    - Supplemental Guidance: Addressing Concerns About Systematic Manipulation Of The Publication Process (https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/addressing-batch-article-manipulation.pdf).
  3. All issues regarding standards of publication ethics and related principles of publishing policy not regulated by these principles are regulated by the relevant COPE guidelines (https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Guidelines).
  4. The following rules supplement the Journal’s statute. In the event of a conflict between these rules and the regulations of the Journal’s statute, the norms resulting from the Journal’s statute shall prevail.
  5. For the purposes of the following rules, the following definitions of the used terms shall apply:
    5.1. Manuscript - a scientific text submitted by the author for the publication procedure.
    5.2. Scientific article – a manuscript that has gone through the publication procedure and has been published in the Journal.
    5.3. Ghostwriting - the practice of "creating a work by a ghost author on behalf of another person, in order to publish it under the name or pseudonym of a third party (the client or someone else)." Quoted in:M. Grudecki, Rozdział I Ghostwriting i  guest authorship oraz ich odmiany w świetle prawa autorskiego [w:] Ghostwriting i guest autorship. Analiza prawnokarna, Warszawa 2023. https://sip.lex.pl/#/monograph/369532661/7?keyword=ghostwriter&tocHit=1&cm=SFIRST (access: 2024-11-20 20:54 Polish version).
    5.4. Guest authorship (guest writing) - "the phenomenon of assigning co-authorship of a work to a person who does not meet the criteria for such attribution in the light of copyright standards, often taking no part in the creation of the work/having no influence on its final shape." Quoted in: M. Grudecki, 2. Gościnne autorstwo ( guest authorship ) i jego odmiany [w:] Ghostwriting i guest autorship. Analiza prawnokarna, Warszawa 2023. https://sip.lex.pl/#/monograph/369532661/8?keyword=ghostwriter&tocHit=1&cm=SFIRST (access: 2024-11-20 20:56 Polish version).
    5.5. Gift authorship - a practice in which a person is identified as the author of a work, while there is evidence that he or she made no or minimal contribution to the research or creation of the manuscript. (https://publicationethics.org/gift-authorship-case-discussion access: 2024-11-20 22:01).
    5.6. Plagiarism - "unlawful appropriation of all or part of another person's work or artistic performance by distributing it under one's own name without changes or with changes." Quoted in: J. Sieńczyło-Chlabicz, Rozdział VI PLAGIAT W UCZELNIACH WYŻSZYCH [w:] Prawo własności intelektualnej. Teoria i praktyka, red. J. Sieńczyło-Chlabicz, Warszawa 2021. https://sip.lex.pl/#/monograph/369500544/94/sienczylo-chlabicz-joanna-red-prawo-wlasnosci-intelektualnej-teoria-i-praktyka?keyword=plagiat%20definicja&cm=SREST (access: 2024-11-20 21:01)
    5.7. Self-plagiarism - "Self-plagiarism is the practice of repeated publication of the same work in whole or in part by its creator, in which he made no changes or made only minor changes, so that the essential core of the work remained unchanged." Quoted in J. Sieńczyło-Chlabicz, 5. Autoplagiat [w:] Prawo własności intelektualnej. Teoria i praktyka, red. J. Sieńczyło-Chlabicz, Warszawa 2021. https://sip.lex.pl/#/monograph/369500544/99/sienczylo-chlabicz-joanna-red-prawo-wlasnosci-intelektualnej-teoria-i-praktyka?keyword=autoplagiat&cm=STOP (access: 2024-11-20 21:02 Polsih version)
    5.8. Fabrication and falsification of data – Fabrication of data involves referring to false data (especially fictitious one) and presenting them as true one. Data falsification involves manipulating, changing and unjustifiably omitting data. (ALLEA (2023) The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity – Revised Edition 2023. Berlin. DOI 10.26356/ECOCS.10.)
    5.9. Author - the person who created the manuscript understood as a work within the meaning of the Act of February 4, 1994, on copyright and related rights (Journal of Laws of 1994, No. 24, item 83, as amended, hereinafter referred to as "copyright law") . The author is not an AI (artificial intelligence) program.
    5.10. Co-author – a person who was one of the creators of the manuscript understood as a work in accordance with the provisions of copyright law.
    5.11. Minor changes - editorial activities carried out by the Editorial Board in the manuscript during the publication procedure, which do not affect the substantive scope of the content of the manuscript and its reception, consisting in particular of improving the formatting of the text and its spelling.
    5.12. Publication procedure – activities leading to the possible publication of the manuscript in the Journal. It includes in particular: submitting the manuscript to the Journal, the Editorial Board’s decision to submit the manuscript to the review process, the review process, discussion, making editorial corrections and publishing the manuscript.
    5.13. Conflict of interest - the occurrence of circumstances that may raise doubts as to the impartiality of the Editorial Board members and/or reviewers in the publication process, resulting in particular from personal relationships, professional relationships, financial dependence of the author or the institution employing or affiliated with him.
    5.14. Violation of the principles of publishing ethics - unfair, unethical, unjust, reprehensible, unreliable practices in the creation of a manuscript, consisting in particular of: plagiarism, self-plagiarism, intentional, incorrect or unreliable citations, omitting the authors of the manuscript, using materials and sources for which there is no consent or consents have been obtained, acting in conditions of conflict of interest, submitting for the publication procedure manuscripts already published or submitted for publication in another journal, monograph or other type of publication, infringement of copyright or derivative rights, forgery, falsification and manipulation of data, and conscious reporting of untruths.
  6. The procedures for submitting manuscripts for publication, reviewing, publishing and proceeding after their publication are open and publicly available.
  7. Contact with the Editorial Board is possible via e-mail, using the following address: glosa@mail.umcs.pl

Editorial Board

  1. The Editorial Board ensures compliance with principles of publishing ethics in the Journal and prevents their violations. At every stage of the publication procedure, all actions of the Editorial Board are consistent with the principles of impartiality, objectivity, reliability and justice. The Editorial Board ensures compliance with provisions of law, in particular copyright standards, protection of personal data and personal rights.
  2. The editors refrain from discriminating against authors in any respect.
  3. The Editorial Board informs the author about the stage of the publication procedure at which the submitted manuscript is at. The Editorial Board informs the author about the result of the editorial assessment of the submitted manuscript, the result of the review process and whether the manuscript is accepted for publication or rejected.
  4. The Editorial Board ensures the confidentiality of information and data relating to the author. They are disclosed in accordance with the principles of personal data protection, only to the extent necessary to carry out the publication procedure. Access to the above-mentioned information is available to the author/co-authors, selected reviewers, authorized editors and the publisher.
  5. The editors do not use the submitted manuscripts in any way that is not agreed with the author or does not result from legal provisions. A member of the Editorial Board may use unpublished manuscripts in his/her own scientific activities only after obtaining the express written consent of the author.
  6. Via e-mail: glosa@mail.umcs.pl, everyone can send any comments, complaints, requests and other messages to the Editorial Board. The Editorial Board registers, archives and confirms their receipt. Comments and complaints regarding the Editorial Board’s functioning are addressed directly to the Editor-in-Chief.

THE AUTHOR AND HIS/HER OBLIGATIONS

  1. The Journal introduces clear and ethical rules regarding determining the authorship of submitted manuscripts and published scientific articles, as well as rules of conduct in the event of possible doubts and conflicts regarding the authorship of a manuscript/scientific article.
  2. The author's obligation is, in particular, to ensure compliance with the principles of publishing ethics.
  3. The editors ensure that no author/co-author of the manuscript is omitted in the publication procedure. The Editorial Board ensures that all authors/co-authors follow the appropriate rules of the publication procedure.
  4. If there are any doubts as to the authorship of the manuscript, the Editorial Board suspends the publication procedure.
  5.  When submitting the manuscript for the publication procedure, the author must submit a declaration of the authorship of the manuscript.
  6. When submitting the manuscript to the publication procedure, the author must declare that the submitted manuscript has not been published anywhere else, and that it is not the subject of a publication procedure in another journal, monograph or other type of publication.
  7. It is the author's responsibility to submit a declaration of a potential conflict of interest. The author is obliged to disclose all potential conflicts of interest.
  8. The author's obligation is to reliably and honestly cite all publications used in the manuscript, correctly quote fragments of works by other authors, and correctly cite other scientific sources. It is forbidden to intentionally omit some sources or cite sources that have not been read.
  9. If the text contains personal data, the author is obliged to anonymize it or obtain consent to use it from the persons to whom the data relates.
  10. It is the author's obligation to inform about any possible contribution, especially financial, of scientific and research institutions or other entities to the creation of the manuscript.
  11. The author is obliged to participate in the publication procedure, in particular the process of editing the manuscript.
  12. The author may give express written consent to the use of his/her unpublished manuscript.
  13. If significant errors or inaccuracies are detected in the manuscript/scientific article, the author is obliged to immediately notify the Editorial Board so that corrections can be made, erratum published or the scientific article withdrawn. The author is obliged to cooperate with the Editorial Board in this process.
  14. If the circumstances justifying the initiation of the author's removal procedure before publication of the manuscript arise, Editorial Board follows the principles set out in Changes in authorship: Removal of author – before publication (https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/authorship-b-removal- before-publication-cope-flowchart.pdf).
  15. If the circumstances justifying the initiation of the author removal procedure after the publication of a scientific article arise, the Editorial Board follows the principles set out in Changes in Authorship Removal Of Author - After Publication (https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/authorship-removal-after-publication-cope-flowchart.pdf).
  16. If the circumstances justifying the initiation of the procedure of adding an author before publishing the manuscript arise, Editorial Board follows the principles set out in Changes in Authorship Addition Of Extra Author - Before Publication (https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/authorship-a-addition-before-publication-cope-flowchart.pdf).
  17. If the circumstances justifying the initiation of the procedure for making changes in authorship after the publication of a scientific article arise, Editorial Board follows the principles set out in Changes in Authorship Addition Of Extra Author - After Publication, (https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/authorship-a-addition-before-publication-cope-flowchart.pdf).
  18. If the Editorial Board entertain doubts regarding the authorship of a manuscript/scientific article, in particular regarding ghost authorship, courtesy authorship and donated authorship, the principles set out in Ghost, Guest, or Gift Authorship in a Submitted Manuscript shall apply (https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/ghost-authorship-submitted-manuscript-cope-flowchart.pdf).

REVIEW PROCESS

  1. The reviewer is selected by the Editor-in-Chief in cooperation with the Managing Editor, in consultation with the members of the Editorial Board.
  2. The reviewer is appointed from among persons who guarantee impartiality, honesty and expertise in the field of the reviewed manuscript. The editors ensure that the review process is impartial, objective and fair. Reviews are prepared by at least two reviewers. In special cases, additional reviewers may be appointed.
  3. When appointing a reviewer, the Editorial Board ensures that he/she has appropriate qualifications to evaluate the manuscript and ensures avoiding the violations of principles of publishing ethics on his/her part, including by applying the principles expressed in How To Recognize Potential Manipulation of the Peer Review Process, (https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/recognising-peer-review-manipulation-cope-infographic.pdf).
  4. The Editorial Board ensures that reviewers comply with the principles of publishing ethics. This applies in particular to preventing the reviewer from appropriating the ideas of the author of the reviewed manuscript. If such an event is suspected, the Editorial Board applies the guidelines contained in Reviewer Suspected To Have Appropriatedan Author's Ideas Or Data (https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/reviewer-misconduct-suspected-cope-flowchart.pdf).
  5. A member of the Editorial Board or a member of the Journal’s Scientific Council is not appointed to act as a reviewer. If the author of the submitted manuscript is a member of the Jorunal’s Scientific Council or a member of the Editorial Board, he/she is excluded from the reviewer selection process.
  6. The reviewer comes from outside the entity to which the author of the submitted manuscript is affiliated or related. In the event of a conflict of interest, the reviewer is obliged to immediately notify the Editorial Board and refrain from reviewing.
  7. When assessing the manuscript, the reviewer is guided by objectivity and substantive requirements, and justifies any reservations he/she may have. Personal criticism of the author of the manuscript is unacceptable. The reviewer is obliged to inform the Editorial Board about suspected violations of the principles of publishing ethics.
  8. When assessing the manuscript, the reviewer uses following review conclusions:
    8.1. Positive review (acceptance for publication)
    8.2. Positive review if certain changes are introducted (acceptance for publication if changes indicated by reviewer are made)
    8.3. Negative review (rejection of manuscript)
  9. Manuscripts submitted for the review process as well as information obtained in this process are confidential. It is unacceptable to disclose them to persons other than authorized persons. The reviewer may not transfer the reviewed manuscript to third parties or use it in his/her own research until it is published. The reviewer may not use the reviewed manuscript for his or her own needs and benefits.
  10. Authors and reviewers do not know each other's personal details. The Editorial Board mediates contacts between them.
  11. The content of the review is not public, it is disclosed only to the Editorial Board and, after anonymization, to the author/co-authors of the text.
  12. The reviewer is obliged to deliver the review within the agreed deadline. The reviewer is obliged to immediately inform the Editorial Board if it is impossible to comply with this obligation.
  13. If the suspicions of manipulation carried out during the review process arise, Editorial Board follows the principles expressed in Peer Review Manipulation Suspected During The Peer Review Process, (https://publicationethics.org/files/peer-review-manipulation-during-review-cope-flowchart.pdf).
  14. The originals of the reviews are kept by Editorial Board.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

  1. Both authors and reviewers are obliged to disclose all potential and factual conflicts of interest.
  2. When appointing a reviewer, the Editorial Board ensures the avoiding of conflicts of interest.
  3. If the suspicion of an undisclosed conflict of interest regarding an unpublished manuscript arise, the Editorial Board, following the procedure set out in Undisclosed Conflict of Interest in a Submitted Manuscript, (https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/conflict-of-interest-submitted-manuscript-article-cope-flowchart.pdf), carefully checks whether any applicable rules have been violated.
  4. If the suspicion of an undisclosed conflict of interest regarding a published scientific article arise, the Editorial Board, following the procedure set out in Undisclosed Conflict of Interest in a Published Article, (https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/conflict-of-interest-publlished-article-cope-flowchart-v2.pdf), carefully checks whether any applicable rules have been violated.
  5. If a member of the Editorial Board is suspected of having a conflict of interest, he/she is obliged to withdraw from the publication procedure. If a member of the Editorial Board submits a manuscript for the publication procedure, he/she excludes himself/herself from the publication procedure of this manuscript. He/she acts in the same way when a manuscript is submitted by a person staying in close relationship with him/her. This member of the Editorial Board does not have access to information and data in this publication procedure.

PUBLICATION PROCEDURE

  1. All manuscripts submitted to the Journal's publication procedure are checked by the Editorial Board in terms of meeting the principles of publishing ethics.
  2. The decision to submit the manuscript for publication is made by the Editorial Board. The criteria for accepting a manuscript for publication are the scientific importance and originality of the work, compliance with the Journal's profile, compliance with the principles of publishing ethics, compliance with formal requirements and the result of the review.
  3. The Editorial Board may withdraw the manuscript from the publication procedure, in particular in the event of a violation of the principles of publishing ethics.
  4. The author is obliged to respond to the review within the time specified by the Editorial Board. The author has the right to submit a request to the Editorial Board to make corrections in the manuscript.
  5. The Editorial Board may make minor changes to the manuscript without the consent of the author/co-author.
  6. In exceptional cases, with the consent of the Editor-in-Chief, a previously published scientific article may be published, with adding an appropriate annotation and a reference to the original text. This also applies to translations.
  7. Persons who are not authors and who participated in specific substantive and organizational aspects of the creation of the manuscript, with their consent, may be included in the optional "Acknowledgement" part of the published scientific article.

POST-PUBLICATION PROCEDURE

  1. The Editorial Board allows and facilitates a debate after the publication of a scientific article. This occurs in particular by sending messages to the Editorial Board. Questions and polemics are directed to the Editorial Board. The Journal introduces procedures for possible checking, making corrections and withdrawing scientific articles after publication.
  2. In the process of managing discussion and criticism expressed after the publication of a scientific article, the Editorial Board applies the principles expressed in Handling of post-publication Critiques, (https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/handling-post-publication-critiques-cope-flowchart.pdf).
  3. The Editorial Board is ready to publish corrections, errata, explanations and apologies if necessary.
  4. Any significant changes and/or additions to the scientific article that affect the reception of it, in particular in terms of authorship, must be described in a publicly available correction by the Editorial Board, indicating the reason and scope of the change and/or addition.

VIOLATIONS OF PRINCIPLES OF PUBLISHING ETHICS

  1. The Editorial Board always thoroughly checks all doubts, reservations and comments in relation to reported suspicions of violating the principles of publishing ethics. Doubts, reservations and comments should be sent to the Editorial Board’s e-mail address.
  2. It is unacceptable for authors to violate the principles of publishing ethics.
  3. The need to apply principles of publishing ethics is required both during and after the publication process.
  4. The Editorial Board guarantees anonymity to whistleblowers who express such a wish. The Editorial Board cannot persuade the whistleblower to reveal his/her identity.
  5. In the event of receiving information regarding a suspected violation of the principles of publishing ethics by the author, the Editorial Board calls on the author to provide immediate explanations. If there is no response or if the suspicions are justified or confirmed, the scientific institution employing or affiliated with the author is informed. In this respect, the Editorial Board also meets the standards arising from generally applicable law.
  6. In the event of confirmation of plagiarism and/or self-plagiarism in the submitted manuscript, the Editorial Board rejects it and notifies the institution employing or affiliated with the author.
  7. If the violations of principles of publishing ethics, plagiarism or self-plagiarism in a published scientific article occur, the Editorial Board ceases to publish it, publishes appropriate information and notifies the scientific institution employing or affiliated with the author.
  8. The Editorial Board records and archives all cases of violation of the principles of publishing ethics.
  9. The Editorial Board applies principles of counteracting manipulation in the publication process in accordance with the guidelines and good practices contained in Systematic Manipulation of the Publication Process, (https://publicationethics.org/files/publication-process-manipulation-cope-flowchart.pdf).
  10. In the event of reporting doubts and reservations regarding violations of the principles of publishing ethics directly to the Editorial Board, it applies the rules set out in Responding to whistleblowers when concerns are raised directly (https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/respond-whistleblowers-concerns-cope-flowchart.pdf).
  11. In the event of reporting doubts and reservations regarding violations of the principles of publishing ethics indirectly, e.g. via social media, Editorial Board applies the principles set out in Responding to whistleblowers when concerns are raised via social media (https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/respond-whistleblowers-concerns-on-socialmedia-cope-flowchart.pdf). In such cases, the Editorial Board does not engage in any discussion and tries to prevent it from taking place on social media.
  12. If the suspicion of self-plagiarism in the submitted manuscript arises, Editorial Board applies the rules set out in Redundant (Duplicate) Publication in a Submitted Manuscript, https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/duplicate-publication-submitted-manuscript-cope-flowchart.pdf).
  13. If the suspicions of plagiarism in the submitted manuscript arise, the Editorial Board applies the principles set out in Plagiarism in a Submitted Manuscript, https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/duplicate-publication-published-article-cope-flowchart.pdf).
  14. If the suspicions of plagiarism in a published scientific article arise, the Editorial Board applies the principles expressed in Plagiarism in a Published Article, https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/plagiarism-submitted-manuscript-cope-flowchart.pdf).
  15. If the suspicions that a manuscript has been submitted to more than one journal at the same time arise, Editorial Board applies the rules set out in Concurrent Submission of a Manuscript to Multiple Journals, (https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/plagiarism-published-article-cope-flowchart.pdf).
  16. If the Editorial Board has any doubts regarding the inappropriate use of graphic images, it applies the rules set out in Inappropriate Image Manipulation in a Published Article, (https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/concurrent-submissions-multiple-journals.pdf).
  17. If suspicions of falsification of data in a submitted manuscript arise, Editorial Board applies the principles expressed in Fabricated Data in a Submitted Manuscript, (https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/image-manipulation-published-article-cope-flowchart.pdf).
  18. If suspicions of falsification of data in a published scientific article arise, Editorial Board applies the principles expressed in Fabricated Data in a Published Article, https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/fabricated-data-submitted-manuscript-cope-flowchart.pdf).
  19. The Editorial Board always thoroughly checks suspicions of a potential threat or privacy breach in an unpublished manuscript in accordance with the principles expressed in Concerns about risk (e.g. potential harm or privacy breach) pre-publication (https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/fabricated-data-published-article-cope-flowchart.pdf).
  20. The Editorial Board always thoroughly checks suspicions regarding a potential threat or breach of privacy in a published scientific article in accordance with the principles expressed in Concerns about risk (e.g. potential harm or privacy breach) post-publication, (https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/concerns-unpublished-data-risk.pdf).
  21. The Editorial Board always thoroughly checks suspicions regarding a potential violation of the principles of scientific integrity in an unpublished manuscript in accordance with the principles expressed in Scientific Rigor Flowchart Unpublished Data, (https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/concerns-published-data-risk.pdf).
  22. The Editorial Board always thoroughly checks suspicions regarding a potential violation of the principles of scientific integrity in a published scientific article in accordance with the principles expressed in Scientific Rigor Flowchart Published Data, (https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/concerns-rigour-unpublished-data.pdf).
  23. The Editorial Board always thoroughly checks suspicions regarding a potential violation of legal standards regarding an unpublished manuscript in accordance with the principles expressed in Concerns involving legal and regulatory restrictions Pre-publication, (https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/concerns-rigour-published-data.pdf).
  24. The Editorial Board always thoroughly checks suspicions in terms of a potential violation of legal standards regarding a published scientific article in accordance with the principles expressed in Concerns about legal and regulatory restrictions Post-publication, (https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/concerns-legal-unpublished-data_0.pdf).
  25. If there are any doubts regarding the compliance with ethical principles in the submitted manuscript, in particular the lack of appropriate consents, the Editorial Board applies the principles expressed in Suspected Ethical Problem in a Submitted Manuscript, (https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/concerns-legal-unpublished-data.pdf).
  26. If the suspicions of manipulation in the review process after publication of a scientific article arise, Editorial Board applies the principles expressed in Peer Review Manipulation Suspected After Publication, (https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/ethical-problem-in-submitted-manuscript-cope-flowchart.pdf).
  27. In the event of Editorial Board making contact with research institutions due to violations of the principles of publishing ethics, it applies the principles set out in Guidance for when institutions are contacted by journals (https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/institutions-contacted-by-journals-cope-flowchart.pdf).