The Editorial Board of "Universum Historiae et Archeologiae = The Universe of History and Archeology" journal (publisher - Oles Honchar Dnipro National University) adheres to the appropriate requirements of selection and recommendations for publication of submitted articles. These norms meet the requirements of the Certificate of State Registration and the standards of quality of scientific works and correctness of presentation of research results.
The Editorial Board recommends the reviewers participating in the examination of articles submitted to the journal's editorial board follow the provisions determined in the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Authors, reviewers and editors should adhere to ethical standards while preparing research results for publication according to the journal’s profiles.
The submitted materials are not returned by the Editorial Board. The authors should guarantee that the submitted material has not previously been published in other scientific journals. In case of detection of the fact of dishonesty (plagiarism) the responsibility lies with the authors of the provided materials. When a conflict of interest occurs, the Editorial Board follows the Publishing Ethics Resource Kit for editors policy (https://www.elsevier.com/editors/perk).
Ethical responsibilities of the Editorial Board
The Editorial Board carefully selects the materials provided by the authors, taking into account the references of independent reviewers. The editorial board reserves the right to reject the publication of the article or to return it for a revision. The author should revise the article in accordance with the comments of reviewers and the Editorial Board.
The editor should be objective in reviewing all submitted materials, avoiding racial, religious, national, gender and other prejudices. The social status or working place of the author (authors) should not be grounds for rejection or approval of the article. At the same time, the editor can trace the connection of the submitted manuscript with those that were previously given by the same authors.
The editor should process the submitted manuscripts as soon as possible.
All responsibility for accepting or rejecting the manuscript rests with the editor. A responsible and balanced approach to the editor's duties means that the editor takes into account the reviewer's recommendation (who can be a doctor or a candidate of science in the relevant field) concerning the quality of design, novelty of scientific results, as well as accuracy of facts in the manuscript. The Editorial Board may reject a manuscript without review if it is considered not relevant to the Journal’s profile.
The editor and members of the Editorial Board do not provide any other information about the content of the author's materials, except for the persons invited for professional evaluation of the submitted article. The Editorial Board of the journal should respect the intellectual independence of the authors. After a positive decision of the Editorial Board, the article is published in the journal and on registered electronic resources.
The editorial board allows the distribution of any article from the journal or its fragments by electronic networks, provided that a reference to a printed or digital version of the original source is obligatory. Publication and / or distribution of the journal materials by third parties or organizations on paper and any electronic media is prohibited.
In accordance with international copyright law on electronic information resources, materials of the site, electronic journal or project may not be reproduced in whole or in part in any form (electronic or printed) without the prior written consent of the authors and editors of the journal. When using published materials in the context of other documents, a reference to the original source is required.
The responsibility and rights of the editor of the journal in respect of any submitted manuscript authored by the editor himself should be delegated to another qualified person.
Unpublished information, factual materials, arguments or interpretations given in the submitted manuscript may be used by the editor in his own articles only with the consent of the author. In case of conflict of interest due to the editor's previous or current research article, he or she should transfer his or her responsibility as the editor for this manuscript to another qualified member of the Editorial Board.
If the editor is provided with substantiated facts that the main content or conclusions of the article already published in the journal contain errors, the editor should ensure the publication of the relevant notice, which states this error and, if possible, correct it. The error notice can be written by both the person who discovered it and an independent author.
The author has the right to insist that the Editorial Board does not use the services of individual reviewers to examine the manuscript on the grounds of bias or conflict of interest. At the same time, the Editorial Board has the right to engage one of these reviewers if there is reason to believe that their opinions are important for a comprehensive analysis of the manuscript, or if there is a limited number of experts on the subject of the article.
Ethical Responsibilities of the Author
The author should present reliable results of the research, as well as to offer an objective discussion of its significance.
The author of the article is personally responsible for the content of the article and the fact of its publication. The Editorial Board of the journal is not liable to the author and / or third parties and organizations for possible damage caused by the publication of the article. The Editorial Board has the right to withdraw an already published article in case of facts that the article is published in violation of the rights of any of the parties or non-compliance with generally accepted norms of scientific ethics. The Editorial Board informs the author, the person who gave the recommendations, and the administration of the institution in which the work was performed about the withdrawal of the article.
The author should comply with the requirements for the design of the article, which are determined by the Editorial Board of the journal.
The results of the study should be presented quite fully and accurately. Relevant correctly executed references to available historical sources and scientific literature are required, so that scholars have the opportunity to get acquainted with the given facts and to be convinced of the logic of the author's arguments and conclusions. If necessary, the author agrees to provide other researchers with access to unique materials that cannot be accessed in usual way. To ensure the implementation of this requirement, the parties enter into appropriate agreements on provision of materials that limit the scope of their use, in order to protect the legitimate interests of authors and third parties.
Authors are encouraged to cite those works that are relevant to the author's research. In order to ensure the originality of the author's text, with the exception of historiographical genre, it is advisable to quote as little as possible from works that do not relate to the essence of the article. The author should implement source and literary heuristics primarily in order to present in the article exactly the original texts on the research topic. The author should indicate the sources of information and materials used in the article, even those to which he or she did not have personal access.
The article should specify possible dangers and risks that may arise from publication of research results.
The author should not resort to fragmentation of research reports by separate articles. In case of publication of the results of a particular global study, it should be published so that each article represents the completed result of a specific task.
When submitting a manuscript for consideration by the Editorial Board, the author should inform about existing or possible related publications of the author. Copies of such materials should also be provided to the Editorial Board for reference to the manuscript submitted for publication.
The author should not submit a manuscript that actually reflects the same result as another publication or manuscript submitted to another scientific journal. It is correct to submit a manuscript of a summary article that complements a previously published concise preliminary notice of research on the same topic. When submitting a manuscript of such a generalizing article, the author should notify the Editorial Board, and the previous publication should be cited.
The author is responsible for accuracy of description of all cited and used historical sources, scientific literature and other media, except for well-known information. Information obtained during a private conversation or discussion with third parties, in correspondence or other activities should not be used in the article without the confirmed permission of the author or researcher who provided such important information. The same rule should be followed in case of receiving information when providing such confidential services as reviewing manuscripts or grant projects.
Historical research usually involves historiographical analysis on the topic. Therefore, the author's articles may contain scientific criticism of the works of other historians. However, personal criticism should be avoided adhering to the principles of scientific objectivity.
The co-authors of the research manuscript should be those persons who are directly involved in the formation of the scientific work and take responsibility for the published results. The contribution of other persons and organizations involved is reflected in the notes or in the "Acknowledgments" section. The status of the head of the institution or its unit where the study is conducted cannot be an ethical basis for determining such a person as a co-author. A person who died but meets the above requirements should also be qualified as an author. In this case, the co-authors or the Editorial Board indicate the date of his death in a note. Invalid names cannot be specified as authors. The author who submits the manuscript for consideration by the Editorial Board assumes responsibility for including in the number of co-authors only those persons who meet the criteria of authorship. The same author submits to the editorial office contact information and documents, corresponds with the Editorial Board, as well as guarantees the consent of the co-authors to the publication of the article in the journal.
Authors should notify the editorial board of a possible conflict of interest that may result from the publication of the results of the study presented in the manuscript. Authors should avoid direct or covert advertising of services, products of institutions or organizations with which they are legally bound by the terms of the contract or property rights.
Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers
Manuscript review is a compulsory attribute of manuscript preparation for publication.
Manuscript review is an intellectual contribution of a scientist to the development of historical science or archaeology, and therefore is an integral part of his scientific activity.
The Editorial Board requests that the manuscript be examined by a recognized specialist in the relevant field of historical science or archaeology.
If the scholar to whom the Editorial Board refers for review considers that his / her qualifications or research profile do not correspond to the topic of the manuscript, he / she should immediately return the manuscript to the Editorial Board. The Editorial Board and the reviewer enter into an agreement on the terms and conditions of the scientific examination of the manuscript.
The reviewer should give an objective assessment of the quality of the manuscript, the results of theoretical or empirical research, the rationale for their interpretation and the logic of the material, as well as to determine the level of compliance with the latest scientific standards and literary requirements. The reviewer should respect the intellectual independence of authors.
The reviewer should take into account the possible presence of a personal conflict of interest, provided that the analyzed manuscript is ideologically and executively related to the research of the reviewer. If this situation occurs, the reviewer should immediately return the manuscript to the Editorial Board without review with an indication of a conflict of interest.
The reviewer should recuse himself or herself from reviewing any manuscript authored or coauthored by a person with whom the reviewer has an obvious personal or academic relationship that may affect the impartial evaluation of the manuscript.
The reviewer should treat the manuscript in a confidential manner.
The reviewer has no right to disclose or report the manuscript to third parties, to discuss its content with other scholars or third parties, except in emergencies, when the reviewer requires professional advice from an additional specialist.
Reviewers should adequately substantiate their own opinions and clearly present their conclusions so that members of the Editorial Board and authors can understand the reasoning of the comments. All reservations that facts, concepts, theories, statements, conclusions or arguments have already been made public should be confirmed by appropriate bibliographic references.
The reviewer has the right to comment on the insufficient citation by the authors of the works of other scholars who have made a significant and direct contribution to the development of the topic stated in the peer-reviewed manuscript. The reviewer should inform the Editorial Board about the revealed identity in a certain essential part of the peer-reviewed manuscript with a known published article or author's manuscript submitted to another scientific journal.
The reviewer should provide reviewing in accordance with the agreement concluded with the Editorial Board.
The reviewer should not use or publish unpublished information, arguments or interpretations contained in the manuscript without the permission of the author. The reviewer should inform the Editorial Board of the facts of dishonesty present in the manuscript. In this case, the publication of the manuscript information does not contradict the rules of scientific ethics.