Publication Ethics

The following standards are expected in the LingBaW journal of the author, the editor and the reviewer.

All the articles submitted to LingBaW are peer reviewed for authenticity and ethical issues.

Duties of the author

Authorship of the manuscript: Authorship should be limited to those who have significantly contributed to the conception, execution and interpretation of the report study. Before submitting the manuscript, it is necessary to ensure that all the authors have been listed and have approved the final version of the paper.

Originality and plagiarism: Authors should ensure that the work they have submitted is original. If the authors have used the work or words of others, they need to be cited or quoted. Plagiarism is viewed as unethical behaviour and is not acceptable.

Data access and retention: Authors should submit raw data for editorial review, should be ready to provide access to these data, and should be prepared to retain these data within a year from the time of publication.

Multiple or concurrent publication: Authors should not publish a manuscript presenting the same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is not acceptable.

Ghostwriting and guest authorship constitute the lack of scientific integrity and are considered a breach of ethical principles. Authors must indicate the contribution of individual persons in the execution of the manuscript.

Ghost writing refers to a situation when a person who has significantly contributed to the manuscript has not been recognized as the author, or his role has not been mentioned in the acknowledgements.

Guest authorship relates to a situation when contribution of a person to the manuscript is minimal or has not taken place at all, but despite this he is included as an author/co-author of the work.

Duties of the editor

Monitoring the ethical standards: The editorial board monitors the ethical standards of scientific publications and takes measures against any malpractices.

Partiality: When deciding whether to accept or reject a given manuscript, the quality of the work, its originality, clarity and  its relevance to the scope of the journal are crucial. The manuscripts are evaluated on the basis of their scientific merit without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, citizenship or political ideology.

Confidentiality: The editors must ensure that all materials submitted to the journal remain confidential while under review. They must not disclose any information about the submitted manuscript to anyone other than the authors, reviewers and potential reviewers.

Disclosure and conflict of interest: Unpublished materials disclosed in the submitted manuscript must not be used by the editor and the editorial board in their own research without written consent of the author(s). The editorial board does not select as reviewers those who are in personal or professional relations with the author(s).

Duties of the reviewer

Promptness: Any reviewer who does not feel qualified to review the manuscript or knows that its timely review will be impossible should notify the editors.

Confidentiality: All the reviewed manuscripts must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others, except for the editorial board.

Objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively, by means of scientific arguments, in order to improve the quality of the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors is considered inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly and support them with appropriate arguments.

Disclosure or conflict of interest: Reviewers should not review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative or other relations with the author(s). Information obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

Anonymity

All reviews are conducted anonymously. The editors do not disclose the information about the reviewers.