The Scientific Publishing House of the Faculty of Management at the University of Warsaw strives to maintain ethical standards in scientific publications and takes all possible steps against neglect of these standards. Papers submitted for publication are evaluated for accuracy, compliance with ethical requirements, and suitability for science.
The Scientific Publishing House of the Faculty of Management at the University of Warsaw is a member of COPE. The following principles are based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
Authors’ Responsibilities
Authorship of the Work
Authorship should be limited to individuals who have significantly contributed to the idea, project, execution, or interpretation of the work. All persons who have participated in the creation of the work should be listed as co-authors. In the case of other individuals who have influenced certain significant aspects of the scientific article, they should be mentioned or presented as collaborators. The author should ensure that all co-authors are listed in the work, have seen and accepted the final version, and have agreed to submit it for publication.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
The author should disclose all sources of funding for projects in their work, the contribution of scientific and research institutions, associations, and other entities, and any significant conflicts of interest that may affect its results or interpretation.
Standards for Presenting Research Reports
The author of a text based on their own research should provide an accurate account of the work done and objectively discuss its significance. Data forming the basis of the work should be accurately presented in it. The work should contain sufficient details and sources to enable the replication of the research conducted. Statements that are untrue or knowingly inaccurate are considered unethical and prohibited.
Access to Data and Data Maintenance
The author should be prepared to provide access to the data used in the work submitted for review. They should also keep this data for one year from the date of publication.
Multiple, Redundant, or Competitive Publications
As a rule, the author should not publish materials describing the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same work to more than one journal simultaneously is considered unethical and is not allowed.
Confirmation of Sources
The author should cite publications that have influenced the creation of the work and must confirm the use of the work of other authors each time.
Substantial Errors in Published Works
If an author discovers a substantial error or inaccuracy in their work, they have an obligation to promptly notify the Editor-in-Chief.
Originality and Plagiarism
The author submits only an original work to the editor. They should ensure that the names of authors cited in the work and/or excerpts from cited works are correctly quoted or listed.
Ghostwriting
Ghostwriting/guest authorship is a manifestation of scientific unreliability, and any detected cases will be exposed, including notifying the relevant authorities. Manifestations of scientific unreliability, especially violations of ethical principles in science, will be documented by the editorial office.
Editor-in-Chief’s Responsibilities
Publication Decisions
The Editor-in-Chief is obligated to comply with the current legal status regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism and is responsible for decisions that should be published from the submitted works.
Confidentiality
Employees of the Publishing House are not allowed to disclose information about the submitted work to anyone other than, according to the publishing procedure, its author, reviewers, and potential reviewers.
Non-Discrimination
In the fight against discrimination, the Publishing House adheres to the Constitution and the applicable law in the Republic of Poland.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Unpublished works or their fragments cannot be used in the research of employees of the Publishing House or reviewers without the explicit written consent of the author.
Reviewers’ Responsibilities
Editorial Decisions
The reviewer supports the Editor-in-Chief in making editorial decisions and may also support the author in improving the work.
Feedback
Every selected reviewer who cannot review the work or knows that a quick review will not be possible should inform the Editor-in-Chief about it.Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is considered inappropriate. Reviewers should clearly express their views, supporting them with appropriate arguments.
Confidentiality
All reviewed papers must be treated as confidential documents. They cannot be shown or discussed with anyone other than authorized persons.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Confidential information or ideas arising from the review must be kept confidential and cannot be used for personal gain. Reviewers should not review works where there is a conflict of interest arising from a relationship with the author, company, or institution associated with the work.
Confirmation of Sources
Reviewers should indicate publications that the author of the work has not cited. Any statement that an observation, source, or argument has been discussed previously should be supported by an appropriate citation. Reviewers should also inform the Editor-in-Chief of any significant similarities, partial overlap of the content of the reviewed work with any other published and known work, or suspicion of plagiarism.
Reviewing Procedure
All papers submitted to the Scientific Publishing House of the Faculty of Management at the University of Warsaw undergo an initial assessment by the Editor-in-Chief.
Papers positively reviewed are sent to two independent reviewers (experts in the field) appointed by the Editor-in-Chief.
The review takes the form of a written document and ends with the reviewer’s recommendation for rejection or acceptance for publication.
After receiving the reviews, the Editor-in-Chief informs the Authors in detail about the reviewers’ comments on the work and the final decision regarding publication.
Qualification criteria: originality of the applied research method and the topic; accuracy of presenting previous research; quality of own research (if applicable); relevance of research/theoretical considerations; substantive, methodological correctness, and reasoning; contribution of the work to the development of the discipline; selection of literature.
Security Procedures
Crossref Similarity Check
Nadsyłane prace są kontrolowane za pomocą systemu iThenticate, który świadczy usługi z zakresu zapobiegania plagiatom na całym świecie.
Procedural Schemes
In the event of any signs of scientific misconduct, the Publishing House, based on the guidelines proposed by Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), will apply the following procedural schemes:
- Suspected unnecessary publication in the submitted manuscript
- Suspected unnecessary publication in the published article
- Suspected plagiarism in the submitted manuscript
- Suspected plagiarism in the published article
- Suspected data fabrication in the submitted manuscript
- Suspected data fabrication in the published article
- Corresponding author requests the addition of another author before publication
- Corresponding author requests the removal of an author before publication
- Request to add another author after publication
- Request to remove an author after publication
- Procedure in case of suspicion of ghost, guest, or courtesy authorship
- How to detect authorship issues
- Procedure when a reviewer suspects undisclosed conflict of interest (COI) in the submitted manuscript
- Procedure when a reader suspects undisclosed conflict of interest (COI) in the published article
- Procedure when the editor suspects an ethical problem with the submitted manuscript
- Procedure in case of suspicion that the reviewer has appropriated the author’s ideas or data
- How to respond to whistleblowers who have reported their concerns directly
- How to respond to whistleblowers who have reported their concerns via social media.