The editorial team has implemented the standards of ethical publishing work recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). „Place” has also adopted the guidelines and good practices of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education regarding the integrity of scientific work and authorship recognition.

Submissions to the „Place” must be original and previously unpublished. In the case of a paper containing extracts or research that has been previously published, it is essential to provide a clear indication of this fact. The stipulation also applies to cases of co-authorship. The editors decline proposals that have been previously submitted elsewhere.

In the event of an author’s misconduct, such as plagiarism, self-plagiarism, ghostwriting, or others, the article in question will be immediately rejected. The circumstances will be fully documented, the incident will be made public, and the relevant authorities, whether state-affiliated or representing the author’s research institution, will be informed.

No fees are charged by „Place” for the submission and publication of articles.

Editorial team

The editorial team will make every effort to ensure that the process of working with authors and reviewers is as transparent, inclusive, and unbiassed. Furthermore, the editorial team pledges that no more than 25% of the total number of published articles in neither of the last two issues will include authors who are editors, editorial board members, or reviewers of the „Place”.

The editorial board serves as an intermediary between the reviewer and the author in the double-blind peer review process (see the section „Peer Review Process”). It is of the utmost importance to guarantee the anonymity of all parties involved in this process.

The editorial team will consider with due diligence any report of unethical or illegal misconduct related to the content of published materials or the review process, in accordance with the guidelines set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). In a legitimate case, the editorial team will withdraw the article in question or discontinue the review process, and will notify the author or author’s superiors and, if necessary, the relevant authorities. The editors are obliged to inform the author or authors of the allegations made against them and subsequently of the next steps in the investigation procedure.

The editorial team will duly consider any complaint or appeal by an author regarding a review or decision not to accept a submitted paper. If necessary, it will also request an opinion from the editorial board.

The editorial team is open to publishing polemical articles that meet the ethical and substantive standards of scientific debate.

Members of the editorial team will not be involved in the review process for their own articles.

Authors

It is the responsibility of the author to provide the editorial team with original articles that are the result of independent intellectual work and their own research. Furthermore, authors are required to notify the editorial team of any involvement of other authors or specialized entities in the creation of the publication. The same is relevant in the case of a potential conflict of interest. The authors are expected to deliver the article by the deadline agreed upon with the editors.

The editorial team is available for consultation at any stage of the article preparation and publication process. Authors have the right to appeal the editors’ decision to reject the article.

Upon receipt of the review, the authors agree to implement the recommended changes and corrections within the agreed-upon deadline. The failure to implement the proposed corrections may result in the article being rejected for publication. However, it is within an author’s rights to challenge the reviews that have been received. In justified cases, the editorial team may refer articles for re-review. However, an author’s disagreement with the reviews that have been received does not automatically result in the re-review procedure being triggered.

Upon acceptance of the article by the editorial team, the authors accept these rules of publishing ethics.

Reviewers

It is the responsibility of reviewers to read the evaluated articles in a professional, careful, and unbiassed manner. It is expected that reviewers will formulate their comments in a way that is both communicative and comprehensive, and that their statements will be unambiguous. The evaluation must be supported by a clear and well-reasoned argument.

It is expected that reviews will be conducted in a tone that is respectful and kind. The editorial team maintains that the objective of the review is not to humiliate the author of the article. Rather, it is to provide support and guidance in the process of improving the scientific workshop. It is unacceptable to engage in ad personam criticism. In the case that the editors consider a review to be in violation of the above-mentioned rules, they reserve the right to request a review from another researcher.

In the case that a reviewer identifies a potential conflict of interest, it is their obligation to withdraw from the review process. Subsequently, the article will be referred to another reviewer.

In the case of an author being identified as having copied or paraphrased the works of other researchers without clearly indicating this fact, the reviewer is obliged to notify the editors immediately.

It is strictly prohibited to discuss the reviewed article with third parties or to allow them to view the article in question.

Privacy Statement

Any personal data provided to the editorial team, as well as the content of correspondence, is utilized exclusively for the ongoing functioning of the „Place” and will not be made available to third parties.