Publication Ethics
Publication ethics and malpractice statement
Acta Adriatica is a peer-reviewed international scientific journal committed to promoting ethical publishing practices and preserving the integrity of the scientific record. Acta Adriatica’s Publication ethics and malpractice statement has been written in accordance with the documents of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE): Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers, and defines what is expected of the key participants in the publication process: authors, reviewers and editors. Their duties and guidelines for the publication process are listed below.
Authors
Reporting standards
Submitted manuscripts should accurately present the work performed and include an objective discussion of its significance. The manuscript should provide sufficient detail and references to allow others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable. The authors guarantee that the manuscript contains no unlawful statements, does not infringe the rights of others, and that all necessary written permissions to quote from other sources have been obtained.
Originality, plagiarism and acknowledgement of sources
By submitting the manuscript, the authors confirm that it is an original manuscript that has not been published before and has not being considered for publication elsewhere. If the authors have used the work and/or words of others, appropriate citations should be provided. All sources of financial support for the research carried out and the results obtained should be disclosed.
Ethical conduct in research
The authors certify that the research was carried out in accordance with the ethical principles of research with respect to research participants, and that professional standards were maintained in its presentation.
Authorship of the manuscript
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a substantial contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All persons who have made a substantial contribution should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be named in an Acknowledgement section.
The corresponding author
The corresponding author is responsible for communicating with the journal for publication. The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Fundamental errors in published papers
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in own published paper, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the editors and cooperate with them to retract or correct the paper.
Reviewers
Assistance
The reviewers should assist the editors in making editorial decisions and the authors in improving the manuscript.
Timelines
Any invited reviewer who does not feel qualified to review the research reported in a submitted manuscript or knows that its timely review is not possible, should notify the editor immediately so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.
Confidentiality
All manuscripts received for review must be treated confidentially. They may not be shown to or discussed with others unless authorised by the editor. The names of the reviewers are confidential in order to ensure a critical evaluation of the manuscript. Therefore, reviewers are asked not to disclose their names or contact details in the comments intended for the authors.
Objectivity and fairness
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Any personal criticism of the author is unacceptable and will result in review rejection. Reviewers should express their views clearly and with appropriate supporting arguments.
Plagiarism awareness and acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should check for and, where possible, detect any form of plagiarism or academic misconduct in citation while reviewing the submitted manuscript. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement on observations, derivations, or arguments that had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. Reviewers should also bring to the editor's attention any significant similarities or overlaps between the manuscript under review and any other published data of which they have personal knowledge.
Conflict of interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained during a peer- review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not evaluate manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the submitted manuscript.
Editors
Publication decisions
The editors are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal after undergoing peer review will be published. The decision should be based on the paper’s importance, originality and clarity, and its relevance to Acta Adriatica's scope. However, editors have no authority to influence the reviewers who are conducting the review of the submitted manuscripts. Editors should be guided by legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. Editors may consult other editors or reviewers when making publication recommendations and decisions. Editors should maintain the integrity of the academic record and always be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed.
Evaluation
The editors guarantee a fair evaluation of manuscripts on their intellectual merit, regardless of the author’s race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnicity, nationality, institutional affiliation or political persuasion of the authors.
Confidentiality
The editors guarantee that the manuscripts will be treated confidentially and they should not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the editorial staff and potential reviewers. Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript may not be used in an own research without the author's written consent.
Conflict of interest
The editors are obliged to disclose any conflict of interest. In case of their own conflict of interest, editors should recuse themselves from handling the manuscript (i.e. they should ask other member of the editorial team to process the manuscript in which they have conflicts of interest arising from competing, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the manuscript). Editors should require all contributors in the publishing process to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are discovered after publication. If necessary, other appropriate action should be taken, such as publishing a retraction or expression of concern.
Commercial and financial interests
The editors are committed to ensure that advertising, reprints or other commercial revenues do not impact or influence editorial decisions.
Misconduct and malpractice
The editors of Acta Adriatica protect the integrity of published material by making corrections and retractions when necessary and by investigating suspected or alleged misconduct in research and publication. The editors guarantee a fair investigation in the event of suspected misconduct by authors, reviewers or members of the editorial team. If possible ethical misconduct in manuscripts submitted to Acta Adriatica is identified during the submission or review process, the editorial team will follow a rigorous, step-by-step procedure to ensure research integrity and adherence to ethical standards:
- The specific type of misconduct (e.g., plagiarism, falsification of data, duplicate publication, etc.) will be assessed.
- If there is a suspicion of serious misconduct, the manuscript may be put on hold from consideration or retracted if it has already been published. The corresponding author will be informed and an investigation will be initiated.
- The editorial team will investigate the allegations and, if necessary, consult external experts. The accused author(s) will be given the opportunity to respond and provide evidence. If there is no response, the authors are given a deadline to respond, after which the review process is terminated, the manuscript is returned and further action will be taken.
- On the basis of the investigation, the editorial team decides on appropriate action. Possible actions include:
- Publication of "Errata" or "Corrigendum" in the first available issue and publication on the Internet if minor errors are found,
- Retraction of the article and publication of a notice if serious misconduct is found,
- Publication of the "Expression of concern" until the results of the investigation are available, as a warning to readers that the published work may contain errors, inconsistencies or other issues.
- The decision will be communicated to the corresponding author and all co-authors, and Acta Adriatica may issue a public statement or notice of misconduct.
- The details of the investigation and the action taken must be documented in a chronological written report of all evidence and all communications. Acta Adriatica may report the case to the relevant institutions (e.g. the author’s institution or funding bodies).
- In case of repeated cases of proven significant misconduct or ethical violations, Acta Adriatica reserves the right to impose a temporary or permanent publication ban on the author(s). Temporary publication bans will be reviewed at the end of the designated period and, if necessary, lifted or extended. Appeals against sanctions may be made in writing to the journal and/or the publisher. The respondent must submit a written objection to the sanctions or determination based on new evidence or reconstruction of evidence and include a detailed justification for the objection.
The editors of Acta Adriatica will also closely monitor misconduct by reviewers and editors. If the allegations are directed against a member of the editorial team or reviewers, these persons will be excluded from involvement with the manuscript in question and another editor or a new reviewer will be found.
If misconduct by a reviewer is suspected (including, but not limited to: lack of expertise, breach of reviewer confidentiality, bias and competing interests, use of authors’ ideas or results, damage to the character or reputation of another scientist), the editorial team will follow the same steps already described in this procedure (assessment, investigation, taking appropriate action, communicating the decision to all parties involved). In the event of proven misconduct by a reviewer, the reviewer will be permanently removed from the database.
In cases of editorial misconduct (including but not limited to: breach of confidentiality of the peer review process, bias and competing interests, intentionally delaying the progress of a manuscript under review, failure to issue retraction notices, allowing outside individuals or organisations to influence decisions for personal gain or commercial reasons, accepting papers for publication that are known to be fraudulent, publication of one's own work without proper peer review, influencing actions or decisions through bribes or inducements, inappropriate use of funds or resources, use of unethical means to increase the journal’s impact factor), it is expected that the editor in question will no longer be involved with the manuscript and another editor will handle the submission. The editorial team will follow the same steps already described in the procedure (assessment, investigation, taking appropriate action, communicating the decision to all parties involved). In case of proven misconduct of the editor, the editor will be permanently excluded from further work on Acta Adriatica.
To avoid questionable and unethical practices, authors, reviewers and members of the editorial team are strongly advised to follow the best practices and guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (https://publicationethics.org/guidance).
