A publication ethics and publication malpractice
statement
(composed using the Publishing ethics resource kit and in compliance with
Elsevier recommendations)
Ethical guidelines for journal publication
The publication of an article in the peer-reviewed journal GEPHYRA
is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected
network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of
the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles
support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree
upon standards of expected ethical behaviour for all parties involved in the
act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the
publisher and the society.
Archaelogy and Art Publications as the publisher of the journal GEPHYRA takes
its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously
and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities.
We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial
revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, the Archaelogy
and Art Publications and Editorial Board will assist in communications with
other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.
Duties of authors
Reporting standards
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of
the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance.
Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should
contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the
work.
Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and
are unacceptable.
Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and
objective, and editorial works should be clearly identified as such.
Data access and retention
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for
editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data,
if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a
reasonable time after publication.
Originality and plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and
if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been
appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, from passing off
another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing
substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results
from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes
unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication
An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the
same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the
same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical
publishing behavior and is unacceptable. In general, an author should not
submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper.
Publication of some kinds of articles (e.g. clinical guidelines, translations)
in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions
are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the
secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of
the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary
publication.
Acknowledgement of sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors
should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature
of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation,
correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported
without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in
the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant
applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the
author of the work involved in these services.
Authorship of the paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution
to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study.
All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as
co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive
aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as
contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate
co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that
all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have
agreed to its submission for publication.
Hazards and human or animal subjects
If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual
hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the
manuscript. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the
author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all
procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional
guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved
them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed
consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy
rights of human subjects must always be observed.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other
substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the
results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support
for the project should be disclosed. Examples of potential conflicts of
interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock
ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations,
and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be
disclosed at the earliest stage possible.
Fundamental errors in published works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own
published work, it is the authorís obligation to promptly notify the journal
editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the
paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a
published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author
to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of
the correctness of the original paper.
Duties of the Editorial Board
Publication decisions
The editor of a peer-reviewed journal GEPHYRA is responsible for deciding which of the articles
submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in
question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such
decisions. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial
board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force
regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer
with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
Fair play
An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without
regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin,
citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
Confidentiality
The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a
submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers,
potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as
appropriate.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in
an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept
confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors should recuse
themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of
the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering
manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive,
collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors,
companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers. Editors should
require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish
corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed,
other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a
retraction or expression of concern.
Involvement and cooperation in investigations
An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints
have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in
conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally
include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due
consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include
further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies, and if
the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction,
expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant. Every reported act of
unethical publishing behavior must be looked into, even if it is discovered
years after publication.
Duties of reviewers
Contribution to editorial decisions
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the
editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in
improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly
communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. Elsevier shares
the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have
an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.
Promptness
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a
manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the
editor and excuse himself from the review process.
Confidentiality
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents.
They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the
editor.
Standards of objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is
inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting
arguments.
Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by
the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had
been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A
reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity
or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published
paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and conflict of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a
reviewerís own research without the express written consent of the author.
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept
confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider
manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from
competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of
the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.