Publication Ethics of the Czech Journal of the Průzkumy památek
The publication ethics of the journal are based on the standards of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The aim is to prevent illegal and unethical practices at all stages of the publication process in Průzkumy památek (Czech Journal of Historical Monuments’ Research).
Review Process
The peer review process usually lasts eight weeks. This period runs from the date on which the article for review is delivered to the editors according to the instructions included in the Guidelines for Authors section.
Each manuscript submitted for publication in the journal is first reviewed by an editor, and then by at least two independent reviewers who have no conflict of interest with the author. If the text does not meet required formal criteria, it may be rejected by the editor before the peer review process starts and sent back to the author for further adjustments according to the guidelines for authors.
Authors and reviewers remain mutually anonymous throughout the review process.
The selected reviewers fill out the review form, in which they must state whether they recommend the manuscript to be accepted, re-edited or rejected. They must clearly justify their decision in the review and include suggestions for possible improvements to the text.
On the basis of the reviews and recommendations of the editorial board, the author will be informed whether the manuscript was accepted for publication without any changes, under the condition of further revision, under the condition of extensive re-writing, or whether it was rejected completely.
If the text is revised again by the author, the editorial board will decide whether the changes made are sufficient. If this condition is not met, the article can be sent back for further revision. In case the reviewers recommend a major revision of the article, the text will go through another round of peer review, in which both original and new reviewers may participate.
If the author has reservations about the reviewers’ comments, they may share comments with our editors. This opinion will be further examined by the editorial board of the journal and will be presented to the reviewers as well. The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision on the acceptance or rejection of the paper.
Responsibilities of the Authors
Authors must guarantee that they have not offered their manuscript to another journal simultaneously, and that the same text has never been published. They also guarantee that their manuscript is not plagiarized or redundant (that it does not repeat entire sections from their previous work).
The authors are the copyright owners of the text.
The authors cannot contact the editors anonymously. Together with their manuscript, they must also provide their contact information necessary for further communication with the editors. The listed authors include only those who have made a significant contribution to the research and the results presented in the text and who have met the following criteria for authorship:
- Significant contribution to the basic conception of the article, acquisition of data, the process of analysis and interpretation of the data
- Co-writing the article and taking part in its critical revision (intellectual input)
- Both previous points must apply to each author
The following are not reasons for authorship recognition: participation in fundraising, data collection, general supervision of the research group, and honorary authorship. Authors must follow our guidelines for authors which our editors published on the website of the journal, and follow all the formal requirements listed here, including the citation standard rules.
Authors are obliged to respond to the comments made by reviewers and apply suggested changes to the text based on these recommendations. If the authors do not consider the reviewers’ recommendations to be objectively justified, they have the right to contact the Editor-in-Chief who is obliged to present this opinion to the reviewers and the editorial board.
Authors are required to cite sources for each image they intend to publish as part of their text. In case they do not have the rights to publish these images, they need to notify the editors in advance. Authors of the submitted texts must state whether their project was financed through a grant or supported in any other way.
Responsibilities of the Reviewers
Reviewers must alert the editors when suspicions of plagiarism or other unethical publishing practices arise when reviewing the manuscripts.
Reviewers must follow the guidelines established by our editors and must be careful to meet the deadlines. If the reviewer knows that they will not be able to meet the deadline, it is his or her responsibility to notify the editors.
Reviewers must be objective and judge the manuscripts without bias. They must support all their opinions or comments with clear and explanatory arguments. Reviewers should avoid conflicts of interest or notify the editors that their participation in the review process is not possible for this reason. The following are considered conflicts of interest:
- Close professional, institutional or personal ties of the reviewer to the author or one of the members of the group of authors (both are professionally tied to the same institution)
- Collaboration on the same project in recent years
- Professional, financial, or personal benefit of the reviewer from the approval or rejection of the reviewed paper
The manuscripts under review are confidential and must be treated as such. The reviewer cannot distribute the submitted text, provide it to others or misuse the information or knowledge it contains for personal or other purposes.
Any specific or general comment made by the reviewer should be clearly stated in the review or the manuscript itself. The review should conclude with a clear statement whether they recommend the manuscript for publication and under what conditions.
Responsibilities of the Editors
Editors are responsible for the overall content of the journal, its professional focus, and the quality of the published contributions.
The editorial board is also responsible for preventing conflicts of interest and ensuring equal opportunities for all authors.
The editorial board together with the chief editor suggest, approve or reject individual steps of the conceptual and formal development of the journal.
It is within the competence of the editorial board to give its opinion at any time during the entire peer-review process.
Editors prevent possible conflicts of interest between authors and reviewers. They are obliged to ensure that all parties involved remain mutually anonymous.
Editors make sure that only experts on the topic discussed in the article are contacted to review the manuscript.
Editors must respect the individual or literary style of the author if it does not deviate from the standards established for writing scientific texts.
Editors remain objective and impartial. They treat the submitted manuscripts as confidential material and do not provide them to any other party except the reviewers and editorial board.
Editors do not publish articles which are suspected of being unoriginal, the result of plagiarism, or which violate the journal’s publication ethics in any other way.
Editors prepare the submitted text for the editorial board and communicate to its members any comments or complaints made by the author against the results of the review process.
Editors make the final decision to reject or accept the paper for publication.