IPJ Statement Of Publication Ethics
IPJ publishes all its articles only after the positive response in a result of blind peer review. By publishing a peer-reviewed journal we create an important platform of scholarly knowledge, a part of the academia’s network of networks. Peer-reviewed journals publish articles that – in terms of method and ethics – represent the scholarship as such. Malpractice in academic publication is thus an act that endangers development of scholarly knowledge. Therefore, it is critical to prevent publication malpractice and to act ethically and collegially for all involved parties, including authors, reviewers, and editors.
Based on practices advised by Committee on Publications Ethics (http://publicationethics.org/), Elsevier Publishing Ethics (http://www.elsevier.com/editors/perk/what-is-elseviers-position-on-publishing-ethics), and Scopus (http://www.info.sciverse.com/scopus/scopus-in-detail/content-selection), the IPJ Editorial Board approved the following guidelines for editors, reviewers and authors of the Ideology and Politics Journal.
1. Duties of Editor and Editorial Staff Members
1.1. The IPJ editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The IPJ editor is guided by this code and constrained by such legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor’s decision should be based upon his/her best judgment and opinions of other editors or reviewers.
1.2. The IPJ editor and any editorial staff evaluate all submitted manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political orientation of the authors.
1.3. The IPJ editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted article to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, and other editorial staff members.
1.4. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in the IPJ editor’s or any other editorial staff member’s own research without the written consent of an author.
1.5. For more guidance in their work, the IPJ editor and editorial staff members use advice from the COPE Code Of Conduct And Best Practice Guidelines
For Journal Editors at http://publicationethics.org/files/Code_of_conduct_for_journal_editors_Mar11.pdf.
2. Duties of Peer-Reviewers
2.1. Peer review provides the IPJ editor in making decisions in regard with the publication of a manuscript in the IPJ. In some cases, peer-reviewer may assist the author in improving the paper through the editorial communications.
2.2. Selected peer-reviewer may be excused from evaluation of the submitted material if he/she feels 1) unqualified to review this research, or 2) that he/she cannot review the manuscript promptly.
2.3. Each and every manuscript received for review is to be treated as confidential document. The manuscripts must not be disclosed to others except as authorized by the IPJ editor.
2.4. Reviews of the manuscripts should be conducted objectively. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments, and avoid personal criticism.
2.5. Peer-reviewers should identify relevant publication that has not been cited by the author. It is also expected that a peer-reviewer calls to the IPJ editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which he/she knows.
2.6. Information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Peer-reviewers should excuse themselves from assessing manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, or institutions connected to the texts.
2.7. For more guidance in their work, the IPJ peer-reviewers use advice from the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers http://publicationethics.org/files/Ethical_guidelines_for_peer_reviewers_0.pdf.
3. Duties of Authors
3.1. All authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed. Underlying ideas and data should be represented accurately in the paper. Knowingly inaccurate statements manifest unethical author’s behavior and are unacceptable.
3.2. It is expected that all authors submit entirely original works to the IPJ. Usage of ideas, texts, and/or words of others must be properly cited. It is also expected that authors identify publications that have been influential for their research.
3.3. It is expected that authors do not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal.
3.4. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the design and execution of the reported research. All who have made contributions to the manuscript are to be listed as co-authors.
3.5. It is expected that authors disclose any substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results of their research. All sources of support for the author/research should be disclosed in the submitted manuscript.