The Rules of Publication Ethics in force in the ‘Terrorism – studies, analyses, prevention’ journal in line with the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors[1] and Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing[2], Core Practices[3] and COPE Guidance[4]  

All scientific articles sent for publication in the journal are reviewed in terms of their compliance with the ethics rules, integrity, transparency, value and scientific usability.

In cases which have not been included in these Rules of Publication Ethics, the Editorial Team uses adequate schemes of conduct prepared by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)[5].

Rules for Editorial Team Members

Editorial Team Members consistently pay particular attention to the good condition of the journal, its coherence, regularity, availability and quality. They are guided by scholarly integrity and impartiality. The Editorial Team aims to raise scientific, editorial and ethical standards. Editor-in-Chief should be responsible, both procedurally and ethically, for all the content published in the journal (this includes, among other things, decisions on the acceptance of texts, the selection of Reviewers, and the disclosure of conflicts of interest).

I. Monitoring Ethical Standards
 

The Editorial Team consistently controls adherence to standards and ethics rules connected to the publication of scientific texts and counteracts the practices at variance with the established standards.

II. Fair Play Rule

Texts sent for publication are evaluated by the Editorial Team, taking into consideration, first and foremost, their factual knowledge as well as formal and technical components. The decisions of the Editorial Team must be based on scientific values, and such issues as race, gender, faith, ethnic origin, nationality or political beliefs of the Authors must not, in any way, affect the evaluation of the articles[6].

III. Decisions Regarding Publication
 

The Editorial Team decides which materials are going to be published, and which are not. While taking the decision, the following criteria are of the utmost importance: the scientific value of work, originality of formulating the problem, clarity and compliance with the journal’s thematic remit, compliance with the ethics rules, compliance with guidelines regarding factual knowledge and formal components as described in the Information for Authors and Editorial requirements on the journal’s website and points indicated by the Reviewer in the process of peer review.

The Editorial Team is bound to inform the Author(s) about the evaluation mark the sent text received in a peer review.

At any time up to the date of publication of the text, the Publisher (in view of the nature of its activities in the field of national security) reserves the right to withdraw from publishing it in the event of a material change in circumstances which would mean that the publication of this text would no longer be in the public interest, a situation which could not have been foreseen at the time the contract between the Author(s) and the Publisher was concluded, or where the continued performance of that contract could jeopardise a vital national security interest or public safety. The detailed conditions for withdrawing from publication are set out in the specified contract.

IV. Confidentiality Rule
 

Members of the Editorial Team adhere to the principle of confidentiality and therefore do not disclose any information regarding works submitted for publication to unauthorised persons. The only persons authorised to have access to this information are the Authors themselves, selected Reviewers, authorised Editors, Scientific Council Members and the Publisher.

V. Counteracting Conflicts of Interest
 

Unpublished articles cannot be used by the Editorial Team Members or any other persons taking part in the publishing procedures unless written consent of the Authors is provided.

Appointing the Reviewer, the Editorial Team must observe the counteracting conflicts of interest rule.

In the case of the Reviewer, the conflict of interest may arise in circumstances when there are doubts regarding her or his impartiality or may affect her or his actions in the review process, e.g. business, financial, law affiliations, Reviewer’s opinions, scientific competition, and family ties.

If the Editorial Team Member or Scientific Council Member sends a text for the journal, the Editorial Team devotes maximal effort to remain impartial in the process of editing and reviewing. Another Editor of the journal appointed by the Publisher’s management takes the responsibility of these processes, and the person who sends the text is excluded from these processes. The text undergoes a standard, anonymous peer-review process. Procedural decisions relating to the text are taken by the Publisher’s management.

The Editorial Team informs the Reader about the sources of the publication’s financing and institutional support or on the part of the organisations and other persons or subjects (financial disclosure) in the published research.

VI. Complaints and Appeals
 

If any complaints or appeals are lodged, the journal’s Editorial Team is bound to register and archive them. The Editorial Team asks for describing the case in detail in the application form and indicating what kind of content or actions this application pertains to. The Editorial Team is obliged to maintain the anonymity of the personal data of the person lodging a complaint or an appeal unless this person expresses a desire to disclose her or his personal information independently. Persons authorised for possessing this information are: the Applicant, authorised Reviewers and Publisher. The Editorial Team is obliged to provide a reply in written form to the complaints and appeals lodged to the Editorial Team within a deadline not exceeding 30 days from the date when this document has been filed. The reply of the Editorial Team must include at least the evaluation of the case and a description of actions which the Editorial Team has undertaken or plans to undertake because of the case.

VII. Scholarly Integrity Rule
 

Editorial Team Members are obliged to take all actions possible to preserve the accuracy of the scholarly integrity of the texts published. In order to do so they can make necessary amendments as well as, in the case of suspecting unfair practices (plagiarism, falsifying research results, etc.) or unethical actions, decide not to publish the text.

All the indications of scientific misconduct, in particular, ghostwriting, guest authorship, plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, data manipulation, incorrect and negligent research performance and a breach of ethics rules in science are unacceptable and must be analysed immediately and investigated by the Editor-in-Chief and Scientific Council.

The journal’s Editorial Team is bound to register and archive such cases.

The Editorial Team makes a request to provide them with information in case of detecting such practices. It is suggested that the notification contains a detailed description of the case and an indication of the content it applies to.

After receiving a notification, the Editorial Team contacts the Author(s), and requests an explanation, collects and reviews the gathered and provided proof for scientific misconduct and then proclaims a decision to remove, place a disclaimer/amendment, and inform the bodies and/or institutions responsible.

VIII. Ghostwriting and Guest Authorship Barriers
 

Out of concern for scholarly integrity of the published texts, the Editorial Team conducts a selection of the sent articles in line with the rules of ghostwriting and guest authorship barriers. We speak about ghostwriting when someone made a significant contribution to the creation of the publication but their participation has not been indicated as one of the authors or their participation has not been mentioned in the acknowledgements section in the publication. Guest authorship (honorary authorship) is a case when someone, who played a minor part in the creation of the publication or had no part in it at all, had been indicated as an Author/Co-Author of the publication.

In order to prevent cases of ghostwriting and guest authorship, the journal’s Editorial Team establishes agreed procedures.

The Editorial Team requires the Authors to provide the Author’s consent for the publication of the article in the scientific journal ‘Terrorism – studies, analyses, prevention’ containing, among other things, a declaration regarding the type and scope of contribution (percentage) of respective Authors and Co-Authors in the creation of the work along with the data (name, surname, affiliation, ORCID)[7].

Ghostwriting and guest authorship are signs of scientific misconduct, and any detected cases of such practices shall be revealed, including notifying the subjects responsible (institutions hiring the authors, scientific societies, scientific editors associations, etc.).

The Editorial Team requires the information regarding the sources of the publication financing and institutional support of the published research via organisations and other subjects (financial disclosure).

IX. Proofreading  of Texts
 

The Editorial Team, the Author(s) and the Reviewers at the stage of the editing process (preceding text publication) may hold a discussion resulting in proofreading the texts.

The Editorial Team reserves the right to correct the texts after publishing without informing the Readers and the Authors of this fact. It applies solely to what is referred to as minor changes. Minor changes include, e.g. formatting and spelling corrections. These are not significant corrections which influence the reception or the scope of the content presented.

Significant changes such as the removal of the article due to an error, adding or removing the Author, and correction of data influencing the interpretation of research results after the publication, may be implemented in line with the procedures outlined in COPE.
 

X. Text Removal
 

The Publisher may consider text removal if:

• there is tangible proof of a lack of credibility of research results, data fabrication and committing unintentional errors (e.g. counting errors, methodological errors);
• research results have been published earlier elsewhere without making an adequate reference to previous sources or revealing such a piece of information to the Editorial Team, without consent for re-publication or justification (cases of unnecessary publications);
• it contains materials or data without required consent for their use (e.g. the right to use an illustration, the right to use one’s image, other licences and sub-licences, including the incorrect scope of operation fields or time scope for such consents/licences);
• it breaches copyrights or related rights;
• the procedures of ethics have not been followed during research or the rules of international, national or institutional law have been violated;
• the lack of Authors’, Reviewers’ or Editorial Team’s conflicts of interest rule has been breached, which influences the interpretation of texts;
• the work bears signs of plagiarism, auto-plagiarism or breaches other ethics rules;
• there is a material change in circumstances which would mean that the withdrawing the text would be in the public interest, a situation which could not have been foreseen at the time the text was published.  Decisions regarding this matter are made by the Publisher.

The notification about text removal must be presumed to be equivalent to article removal. Such a notification should contain the information about the person (the headline should include at least the title(s) and the work Author’s surname(s)) and reasons upon which the text has been removed (in order to distinguish between unintentional errors and purposeful malpractices). The removed texts are not deleted from the printed version of the journal, however, the very fact and reason for the removal shall be indicated in a clear manner. It does not apply to a situation in which the legitimate interest of the Author, Editorial Team, Publisher or third parties or the public interest would be breached, as in such cases the text may be removed, and the Editorial Team is bound to publish an explanatory notice. The Author has a right to lodge an appeal against the Editorial Team’s decision.

In other cases, the Editorial Team obeys the recommendations outlined in COPE Retraction Guidelines[8] and COPE Guidance.

XI. Disclaimers, Explanations, Texts Supplements and Errata
 

The Editorial Team, when needed, is always ready to publish required disclaimers, explanations or apologies. They will be published on the journal’s website and/or in the printed version of the journal.

In a case if – in line with these Rules of Publication Ethics or COPE recommendations, the text does not qualify for removal nor correction of minor changes, the Editorial Team allows to publish errata, supplements and/or disclaimers. Each supplement regarding significant changes (influencing the reception or the scope of presented contents and establishing the authorship) should be supplemented with the Editorial Team’s disclaimer indicating the scope of the supplement and the reason for its introduction.

In the event that the Editorial Team has reasonable grounds to doubt the accuracy of a published text, but the investigation is not yet complete (e.g. no response has been received from the Author, their home institution or the ethics committee), the Editorial Team may publish a warning notice and inform the Readers that proceedings are ongoing. The notice is linked to the article on the journal’s website and remains visible until the proceedings are concluded, after which it is replaced, as appropriate, by an article retraction notice, an errata or a notice stating that the proceedings have been closed without any adverse findings.

The Editorial Team is obliged to analyse and document any indications of scientific misconduct.

Any detected and confirmed cases of scientific misconduct shall be revealed, including notifying the subjects responsible (institutions hiring the Authors, scientific societies, scientific editors associations, etc.). 

XII. Procedure in the Event of Suspected Involvement of ‘Paper Mills’ or Fabricated Reviews
 

The Editorial Team remains vigilant regarding the risks associated with the activities of the so-called ‘paper mills’ (organisations producing fake scientific texts for a fee or acting as intermediaries in their publication) and fabricating reviews (reviews written by people posing as the named Reviewers). The procedure used is in line with the COPE Guidance.

XIII. The Author’s Appeal Procedure against the Editorial Team’s Decision
 

The Author, whose text has been rejected, has the right to appeal against the Editorial Team’s decision within 30 days of receiving the decision. The appeal procedure is separate from the procedure for complaints concerning breaches of publication ethics.

The appeal must be made in writing (e-mail), must include a substantive justification (identifying the specific elements of the review or editorial decision with which the Author disagrees, together with a response to the allegations raised) and must be addressed to the Editor-in-Chief.

The Editorial Team considers the appeal within 30 days. If the appeal contains substantive arguments pointing to possible shortcomings in the peer-review process (e.g. a conflict of interest on the part of the Reviewer, obvious factual errors in the review, or a review that exceeds the Reviewer’s area of expertise), the Editor-in-Chief may commission: an additional review by an independent Reviewer, a re-examination of the text by the Editorial Team, or consultation with the Scientific Council on matters of precedent.

The Editor-in-Chief’s decision regarding the appeal is final. The rejection of the appeal does not deprive the Author of the right to submit the text to another journal. Lodging an appeal does not suspend other procedures, in particular proceedings concerning allegations regarding scientific integrity.

XIV. Openness and Constant Access Rule
 

The Editorial Team supports the open access policy. The journal is published via Open Access, which means that all contents are available for users and institutions free of charge.

All texts are published in an electronic version. The Editorial Team aims to archive texts in various databases.

XV. Rules Applying to Data Sharing and Data Reproducibility
 

The Editorial Team does not demand that the Authors attach research data. In selected cases the Editorial Team may, however, approach the Author and ask for providing research data (e.g. if the Editorial Team is notified of issues with the integrity of presented data or data duplication). The Editorial Team encourages the Authors to archive research data in open research data repositories.

XVI. Advertisements
 

The Editorial Team accepts publishing only the following types of advertisements in the journal:

• scholarly activity, scientific conferences, business conferences, workshops, and other events related to the subject matter of the journal;
• publishing and other activities of the journal’s Publisher.

The journal does not publish sponsored articles or paid commercial advertisements.

The advertisement must be separated from the contents published in the journal.
Advertisements do not have any influence on making editorial decisions by the Editorial Team.

XVII. Fees for Authors and Reviewers
 

No article processing charges, submission fees, publication fees, review fees or processing fees are incurred by the Editorial Team.

As a general rule, article Reviewers do not receive remuneration. In exceptional cases (e.g. a special issue), the Editorial Team may make an exception to this rule.

Authors of articles published in the journal receive remuneration in accordance with the terms set out in the contract between the Author and the Publisher. The terms of this contract are available only to the parties involved. Authors of articles published in the ‘Awarded theses’ section of the journal do not receive remuneration.

Journal’s Editorial Team Contact Details

Doubts regarding to scientific integrity, discussions, comments, debates, as well as complaints and requests to the Editor-in-Chief should be addressed to: wydawnictwo@abw.gov.pl.

Rules for Authors

I. Rules for Authorship of Work
 

Authorship may relate to persons or groups who produce the idea or work on the publication popularising intellectual or creative work.

Only a human can be the Author of scientific texts. AI tools cannot be recognised as the Authors or Co-Authors of the publication, as they do not meet the criteria for authorship set out in the standards of publication ethics, in particular those relating to responsibility for the content of the work, declarations of conflicts of interest and the ability to approve the final version of the article.

All persons named in the sent work as Authors must play an actual, significant part in the creation of the text (project, idea, planning, performance, results interpretation). Moreover, all persons, who had an impact on the final shape of the work should be named as Co-Authors. The Author who sends the text for publication has an obligation to make sure that persons having contributed to the creation of the article accept its final form.

The remaining persons to whom this condition of Authorship does not apply and whose contribution to text creation was insignificant (e.g. general mentoring, research coordination, data collection) may consent to be listed in the Acknowledgement section.

The order of Authors must be agreed upon and accepted by all the Authors of the text. The change of authorship or the order in unpublished texts requires the consent of all the text’s Authors, Reviewers and Editor-in-Chief as well as providing an explanation for such changes. After the publication of the text, it is possible to implement the changes in the information about the Authors only in line with the procedures outlined by COPE.

The Editorial Team requires the Authors to issue statements, in particular, declarations regarding the type and scope of respective Authors’ contribution to the creation of work along with their data (name, surname, affiliation, ORCID).

Before the publication of the text, the Author(s) sign an appropriate contract with the Publisher and provide the Editorial Team with an Author’s consent for the publication of the article in the scientific journal ‘Terrorism – studies, analyses, prevention’[9] confirming meeting the criteria of authorship outlined in these Rules of Publication Ethics. The contributions of respective Authors in the creation of the publication are presented; the statement of not having omitted any other persons deserving merits of authorship and the responsibility for the completeness and correctness of the statements made.

The Author, sending the text for publication, obliges to enter editorial corrections, respond to a review within a deadline set by the Editorial Team and declares that upon the Editorial Team’s appeal, she or he will accept the responsibility for replying to the initiated discussion or polemics.

The Author(s) may request amendments to the text during the Author’s proofreading stage; the final decision on whether to incorporate these amendments rests with the Editorial Team.

II. Fair Play Rule
 

Texts sent for publication are evaluated by the Editorial Team first and foremost in terms of their factual knowledge as well as formal and technical components. Decisions of the Editorial Team must be based on scientific values, and such issues as race, gender, faith, ethnic origin, nationality or political views of the Authors must not affect the evaluation of the articles in any way. If the Author suspects that the fair play rule has been breached, she or he may lodge a complaint to the Editor-in-Chief of the journal[10]. 

III. Scholarly Integrity Rule
 

Authors of the texts sent for publication are obliged to describe the performed scientific research in a diligent way and interpret the results impartially. The works should contain as much information as possible to enable the identification of the sources of data and research repetition. Presentation and interpretation of data and research results which are inaccurate and inconsistent with the ethics rules are unacceptable and may result in text removal.

All the indications of scientific misconduct, in particular, ghostwriting, guest authorship, plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, data manipulation, Matilda effect[11], Matthew Effect[12], incorrect and negligent research performance and a breach of ethics rules in science are unacceptable and must be analysed immediately and investigated by the Editor-in-Chief and Scientific Council. The journal’s Editorial Team is bound to register and archive such cases.

Texts violating the rules of scholarly integrity shall not be accepted for publication. In a case when misconduct has been notified/noticed after the text has been published, the Editorial Team – after having received such a notification – contacts the Author and asks for an explanation, collects and reviews the gathered and provided proof for scientific misconduct and then gives the decision on removal, disclaimer/correction, informing the bodies and/or institution responsible. The Author has a right to lodge an appeal against the Editorial Team’s decision.

IV. Rule of Sources Integrity
 

The Authors of the sent works are always obliged to indicate publications and other sources which have been used by them during the creation of the article.

V. Rule of Work Originality
 

Authors can send only their own, original texts for publication. These texts cannot be simultaneously sent to another journal/publication nor constitute a part of a journal/publication which has already been published.

Only in exceptional and justified cases may the Editor-in-Chief give consent for another publication of a text which has been published previously. The text must contain a bibliographic reference to the text published initially.

Authors, using the research or referring to data or words of other persons should use appropriate markers indicating citations. Plagiarism and data fabrication are unacceptable.

The journal accepts submissions of texts previously made available by the Author as preprints in a reputable open-access repository (e.g. SSRN, arXiv, RePEc, ResearchGate, Academia.edu, institutional repository) subject to the following conditions: 1) at the time of the text submission, the Author shall inform the Editorial Team of the fact and location of any previous publication of the text, 2) the preprint has not been peer-reviewed or published in another journal, 3) following publication in the journal, the Author shall update the entry in the preprint repository, providing the full bibliographic details of the published version (DOI).

The earlier release of the text as a preprint is not regarded as prior publication within the meaning of the rule of originality.

VI. Rule of Counteracting Conflicts of Interest of Authors
 

Unpublished articles cannot be used by the Editorial Team Members or any other persons participating in the publishing procedures without the written consent of the Authors.

Authors, sending the text, are provided with information regarding the sources of financing the publication and support of published research via institutions, organisations or other persons and subjects (financial disclosure).

Authors issue a statement that no conflict of interest occurs[13].

The Editorial Team may ask the Authors to send them the text for publication in an anonymised form in order to preserve the confidentiality of data in the reviewing process.

VII. Rule of Data Sharing
 

Authors may be asked to present unprocessed research results, therefore, they should be prepared to provide access to these data. Attaching research data to articles is not required. The Editorial Team encourages the Authors to archive these data in open repositories of research data[14]. Then, they can enter the correct citation form in one’s publications, providing for example a DOI number or another identification number.

VIII. Rules on Errors in Published Papers
 

If the Author discovers significant errors or inaccuracies in their text, they are obliged to immediately notify the Editorial Team of the journal in order to withdraw the text, prepare an errata or correct the errors.

The Author, by declaring his willingness to publish the article, at the same time declares that they will fulfil the obligation to respond to the Editor Team’s call for explanations regarding possible complaints, grievances, allegations of scientific unreliability regarding the published text.

IX. Proofreading of Texts, Additions
 

The Author, the Editorial Team and the Reviewers may correct the texts at the stage of the editorial process (before the publication of the text), through discussion. By submitting a text for publication, the Author undertakes to actively participate in discussions with the Editorial Team of the journal.

The Editorial Team reserves the right to correct texts after publication of the text without informing the Authors. This applies only to the so-called minor changes. Minor changes include, for example, corrections to formatting and spelling. These are not significant adjustments that affect the reception or scope of the content presented.

Significant changes, such as retraction of the article due to an error, addition or removal of the Author, improvement of data affecting the interpretation of research results after publication, may be implemented in accordance with the procedures indicated by COPE.

Authors are required to promptly report and correct any errors, inaccuracies, or misleading statements they discover.

X. Discussion
 

The Author, expressing a will to publish the article, declares simultaneously that upon the summons of the Editorial Team, she or he shall respond to the ensuing discussion.

XI. Text Removal by the Author
 

The Author has the right to remove the text sent to the Editorial Team in case of gross negligence of the Editorial Team during the editing process. In case of serious delays in the editing process, the Authors should be notified of the reason for the delay. The Editorial Team should pass the information of the maximum time of the article proceeding to the Author. Complaints about the Editorial Team’s negligence and requests to remove the article should be addressed directly to the Editor-in-Chief. 

XII. Rules for Personal Data Protection
 

In the case of processing personal data in the text for scientific reasons a provision of rights of a person to whom these data pertains needs to be provided or obtain consent for processing such data, in particular, having in mind international and national law, especially Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation). If it is necessary, the Author should provide the Editorial Team with a contract of entrustment of personal data or adequate authorisations.

XIII. Rules for Respecting the Intellectual Property Rights
 

The Author sending the text for publication must declare that the article is original, does not breach the rights or personal goods of third parties. The author is obliged to inform the Publisher that she or he obtained consent from the persons whose images or words, visual or photographic works have been recorded/used in the work, for their use in the text and sharing.

XIV. Basic Formal Requirements Regarding the Publication
 

The Author, sending the text for publication, obliges in particular to provide the documents and statements required by the Editorial Team and/or the Publisher. Prior to the publication of the text, the Authors:

• sign the contract with the Publisher (the obligation is imposed on all the Authors of the article);
• send the Author’s (or Co-author’s) consent for the publication of the article in the scientific journal ‘Terrorism – studies, analyses, prevention’ to the Editorial Team;
• send a statement regarding the use of AI/GenAI in the preparation of the article.

All required documents in downloadable versions are available on the journal’s website. The terms of the contract signed between the Publisher and the Authors of the texts are available only to the parties involved.

Journal’s Editorial Team Contact Details

Doubts regarding to scientific integrity, discussions, comments, debates, as well as complaints and requests to the Editor-in-Chief should be addressed to: wydawnictwo@abw.gov.pl.

Rules for Reviewers

I. Reviewing Process
 

Reviewers participate in the works of the Editorial Team and have an influence on the decisions made by the Editorial Team. They can also, upon the consensus with the Authors, influence the final shape and polishing of the published works.

The review is conducted in double-blind mode, which means that the Authors and Reviewers do not know each other’s identities.

The identities of Authors are not known to the Reviewer, but they are known to the Editorial Team.

The surnames of the Reviewers of the publications are published in a given number of the journal.

The Review takes place before the text publication after the text has been sent by the Author for the Editorial Team’s evaluation.

The Editorial Team employs at least two independent Reviewers for evaluation of each publication from outside the scientific unit affiliated with the publication’s Author (external reviews). 

The Editorial Team is responsible for the selection of the Reviewers, having in mind in particular research interests, scientific achievements and competencies of the Reviewer in the field of knowledge to which the text in question pertains.

The Author may suggest potential Reviewers to the Editorial Team via the submission form, providing reasons for their suitability. The Author’s suggestions are not binding on the Editorial Team. The Author may also indicate individuals who, due to a conflict of interest, should not review their text.

The Reviewer may refuse to conduct a review due to formal (e.g. conflict of interests, lack of possibility to meet the deadlines for carrying out a review) or informal reasons (scientific interests are not in line with the text’s subject matter). In such a case, the Reviewer is obliged to inform the Editorial Team of this fact immediately.

It is unacceptable to employ the Editorial Team Member as a Reviewer.

As a general rule, a member of the Scientific Council is not appointed as a Reviewer. In exceptional cases (e.g. a special issue), the Editorial Team may deviate from this rule, provided that this fact is disclosed in that issue.

The Editorial Team does not use reviews from other journals, commercial reviewing platforms, Internet forums, etc.

If the Editorial Team Member or the Scientific Council Member is the Author of a text, the selection of the Reviewer is the responsibility of the Publisher’s management. The rules and obligations of the Author apply to such a person, whereas, the privileges for the Editorial Team Member or Scientific Council Member connected to participation in editorial work, reviewing process and making decisions about this text are not granted to such a person. The text undergoes a standard, anonymous peer-review process. Procedural decisions relating to the text are taken by the Publisher’s management.

The review must be in the written form. The Reviewer may send a review form or complete the review using a suitable online form. The review must contain an explicit evaluation regarding accepting the text for publication or its dismissal.

Only texts which have undergone the review process and received two positive reviews can be accepted for publication by the Editorial Team.

Texts in relation to which the Reviewer sees a possibility for accepting the text for publication after the text is corrected may be sent to the Author along with recommendations. The Author enters the adequate corrections, and then the text is sent for another review (the second round of review), if, during the first round of reviews, the Reviewer indicated this was necessary on the review form. The same Reviewer carries out the re-review. Texts which have obtained one negative review may be dismissed by the Editorial Team without conducting the second round of review.

Criteria taken into account during the review process are indicated in the reviewing form.

The Editorial Team sends the Reviewer the reviewing form, which is the basic document in which the Reviewer may include her or his conclusions. The Reviewer may additionally attach other materials to the review form (e.g. written remarks, the text along with comments).

The content of the Review is not publicised.

Review reports are made available to the Authors (after the anonymisation process) and the journal’s Editorial Team.

Any interaction between Authors and Reviewers is unacceptable. Their contact is anonymised. Conclusions and review reports as well as Author’s replies are sent via the Editorial Team or using the right system allowing for data anonymisation in the double-blind review mode.

Interaction between Reviewers of a text is permitted with the consent of, and through, the Editorial Team.

II. Confidentiality Rule
 

All reviewed works are confidential, which means that disclosing them to third parties is unacceptable (except for authorised persons).

III. Rules for Preserving Objectivity Standards
 

Reviews should be objective. Personal criticism of Authors’ works is considered inappropriate. All observations of a Reviewer should be justified adequately.

IV. Scholarly Integrity Rule
 

The Reviewers are committed to meeting the highest standards and ethics rules regarding the publication of scientific texts and preventing practices that counteract the established standards. In order to do that they may enter adequate corrections, and also, in the case of suspicion of dishonest practices (plagiarism, falsifying research results, etc.) or unethical actions, take a decision not to publish the text.

V. Rule of Sources Integrity
 

The Reviewers, if need be, should cite reference works not included by the Author. Any significant similarities to other works should also be indicated and the Editorial Team should be notified about them.

VI. Fair Play Rule
 

Issues such as race, gender, faith, origin, nationality or political beliefs of the Authors must not, in any way, affect the result of the review. Texts sent for publication are evaluated first and foremost in terms of their factual knowledge as well as formal and technical components. Decisions of the Reviewers must be based upon scientific values.

VII. Rule for Counteracting Conflicts of Interest among Reviewers
 

The Reviewers must not use the reviewed works for their personal needs and merits. They cannot evaluate texts in whose case there may be a conflict of interest with its Author(s).

In the case of the Reviewer a conflict of interest may arise in circumstances where there are any doubts regarding her or his impartiality or her or his actions may be in any way influenced during the reviewing process, e.g. business, financial, legal affiliations, Reviewer’s opinions, scientific competition, and family ties.

The Reviewer must not use the peer-review process to compel the Author to cite the Reviewer’s own publications or those of persons designated by the Reviewer, if such citations are not substantively justified by the content of the text under review (the so-called coercive citation). Suggestions for additions to the bibliography must be objectively justified and limited to works necessary for placing the text more firmly within the relevant literature.

VIII. Rule of Timeliness
 

The Reviewers are obliged to provide the review by a set deadline. If for some reason (factual knowledge, lack of time, etc.) they are unable to meet the deadline or review the article, they should immediately inform the Editorial Team of this fact.

In cases which have not been described in these Rules of Publication Ethics, the Editorial Team abides by the guidelines outlined in COPE Retraction Guidelines and COPE Guidance.

Rules governing the use of artificial intelligence tools by the Authors, Editorial Team members and Reviewers

The journal permits the use of artificial intelligence (AI)-based tools and technologies that assist in content generation solely as aids in the process of preparing text.

AI tools cannot be recognised as the Authors or Co-Authors of the publication, as they do not meet the criteria for authorship set out in the standards of publication ethics, in particular those relating to responsibility for the content of the work, declaration of conflict of interest and the ability to approve the final version of the article.

The Authors are obliged to disclose the use of AI tools in the preparation of a text if these tools had a significant impact on: text generation, data analysis, translation, the preparation of visual materials, or the linguistic or technical editing of the text. The authors are required to send the Statement on the use of artificial intelligence tools in the preparation of a scientific article  (AI/GenAI)[15] to the Publisher.

Information regarding the use of AI should be included in the article and should specify the name of the tool used, its version (if applicable) and the scope of its application.

The Editorial Team reserves the right to refuse to publish a text or to retract a published article in the event of: failure to disclose the use of AI, a breach of the principles of scientific integrity, the generation of content in a manner constituting plagiarism, data fabrication or disinformation, a breach of data confidentiality, copyright or research ethics.

The Reviewers and Editors should not upload unpublished texts or confidential material to publicly accessible AI tools.

Rule for the Scientific Council Members

The Scientific Council Members should be recognised experts in the field of knowledge which is in line with the subject matter of the journal.

Names, surnames and affiliations of the Scientific Council Members are published on the journal’s website. The Editorial Team is obliged to update the information on the composition of the Scientific Council immediately.

I. Obligations of the Scientific Council Members
 

The obligations of the Scientific Council Members include:

1. Cooperation with the journal’s Editorial Team and the Publisher, as well as with other members of the Scientific Council.
2. Mentoring, outlining the policy of journal’s development, establishing goals and the journal’s mission, as well as supporting the Editorial Team in carrying out this mission.
3. Caring for maintaining the standards and obeying the ethical rules for the Authors, Editors and Reviewers at each stage of the publication of the texts in the journal, especially, scientific accuracy, procedures transparency, aiming at presenting valuable and useful scientific texts.
4. Aiming at implementing best practices, recommendations and requirements relating to editorial work and scientific information within the journal.
5. Periodical verification of the solutions and practices employed by the journal.
6. Defining the group of journal recipients.
7. Promotion of the journal.
8. Encouraging the Authors and Reviewers to cooperate with the journal.
9. Supporting, upon the Editorial Team’s request, its actions, in the case of any breaches, and in the resolution of disputes and disagreements.

Rules for Readers

​​​​​​​I. Open Access
 

The journal is published within open access, which means, that all its contents are available to users and institutions free of charge at a selected time and place.

Access to contents published online in the journal does not require being signed in.
All texts published in the journal are published in an electronic version under the Creative Commons CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 (Attribution – NonCommercial – ShareAlike 4.0 International) licence, which means that material may be copied and distributed in any medium and format, changed, remixed and adapted (for more, please see: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/deed.pl).

​​​​​​​II. Detecting Signs of Scientific Misconduct
 

The Editorial Team requests the information in case of detecting any signs of scientific misconduct, in particular, ghostwriting, guest authorship, plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, data manipulation, Matilda effect, Matthew effect[16], incorrect and negligent research performance and a breach of ethics rules in science. The Editorial Team is bound to register and archive such cases. It is suggested that the notification contains a detailed description of the case and an indication of the content it applies to.

Such notifications must be analysed and verified immediately by the Editor-in-Chief and Scientific Council.

The Editorial Team, after having received the notification, contacts the Author, requests an explanation, reviews the gathered and provided proof for scientific misconduct, and then announces the decision on removal, disclaimer/correction, or notifies the bodies and/or institutions responsible. The Editorial Team contacts the person who has notified them about the breach and/or announces the decision publicly.

Journal’s Editorial Team Contact Details

Doubts regarding to scientific integrity, discussions, comments, debates, as well as complaints and requests to the Editor-in-Chief should be addressed to: wydawnictwo@abw.gov.pl.