Page 1

Publishing Ethics and Publishing Malpractice Statement History 396 is dedicated to publishing articles under the highest standards of quality and ethics. We maintain these standards of ethical behavior throughout all publication stages and with all members of our journal, including: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, and the publisher. Plagiarism or other unethical behavior is strictly forbidden. Responsibilities of the Editors: •

Publication Selection: The editor of History 396 is responsible for choosing which submitted articles will be published in the journal. The editor must adhere to the journal’s ethical standards and abide by all legal guidelines, including, but not limited to, those that forbid libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor is at liberty to discuss decisions related to article selections with the editorial board, the academic committee, or a reviewer. Nondiscriminatory Clause: The editor will review manuscripts and make decisions about the articles regardless of the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political ideology of the authors. Privacy Agreement: The editor and any editorial staff are prohibited from revealing information about the submitted manuscript to persons other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, or the publisher. Transparency and Interests: The editor is forbidden to use unpublished material in his/her own research unless he/she has obtained the expressed written consent of the author. The editor should refrain from reviewing manuscripts that pose a conflict of interest as a result of any possible connection, either competitive or mutual, with any institutions, companies, authors, etc.

Responsibilities of the Reviewers: •

• •

Privacy: Any manuscript submitted for review is to be considered a confidential document. This manuscript must not be discussed or presented to other parties or individuals. Timeliness: Due to the time sensitivity of reviewing articles, reviewers should inform the editor and decline reviewing an article in the case that he/she knows they will be unable to review the material in a timely manner or if he/she lacks sufficient knowledge on the article’s subject matter. Requirements for Objectivity: Reviews must be done in a neutral manner and reviews must articulate their criticism based on reasonable arguments. Input in Editorial Assessment: Peer reviews provide critical feedback to the editor and for the decisions making process. Reviewers may also help editors by communicating with authors and offering suggestions to improve the article through editorial communication. Recognition of Sources: Reviewers must consider relevant published material that is not cited by the author and whether any considerable resemblance exists between published articles and the manuscript under consideration

Transparency and interests: Private information or ideas collected through the peer review must remain private and not used at the benefit of the reviewer. Reviewers should refrain from reviewing manuscripts that pose a conflict of interest as a result of any possible connection, either competitive or mutual, with any institutions, companies, authors, etc.

Responsibilities of the Author: •

Research Principles: Authors are responsible to present original research, a truthful description of the work required for a paper, and an objective discussion of the importance of the results. Fundamental data must be explained forthrightly in the article. The written report must include enough details and references so that others might repeat the research. Falsified or deliberately incorrect statements constitute unethical activities and will not be tolerated. Numerous, Redundant, or Simultaneous Publication: Generally speaking, an author should not attempt to publish material outlining basically the identical research in more than one journal or other type of primary publication. Submitting the same material to multiple journals and/or publishing the same work in various journals comprises unethical publishing behavior and will not be tolerated. Authenticity and Plagiarism: The authors must guarantee that they submitted wholly original works, and if the text or materials of authors has been used that it is correctly referenced. Plagiarism in any form is unethical publishing behavior and will not be tolerated. Authorship of the Article: Authorship belongs to those individuals who gave considerable input to the formation, design, implementation, or understanding of the article. All individuals who gave considerable input to the paper should be mentioned as co-authors. Other individuals who contributed to other substantive parts of the research should be recognized or listed as contributors. The principal author has the responsibility to include all necessary co-authors and contributors in the paper and to ensure that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the final version of the paper and consented to its submission for publication. Recognition of Sources: Appropriate recognition of the work of other authors is required in the paper. Authors must include publications that were influential in forming the substance of their work. Research collected privately, such as conversation, communication, or dialogue with third parties, is forbidden except in the case of the explicit, written permission of those individuals. Information collected through confidential methods, such as manuscript reviews or grant applications, is forbidden except in the case of the explicit, written permission of the author who provided those services. Transparency and interests: All authors must reveal in their final manuscript if any financial or otherwise significant conflict of interest exist that might interfere with the results and interpretations in their research. All funding for the project must be disclosed. Fundamental Errors in Published Research: When an author realizes a fundamental fault or inaccuracy in his/her own published research, the author is

required to notify immediately the journal editor or publisher and assist to recall or correct their paper. Responsibilities of the Publisher: • We are committed to guaranteeing that the marketing, reprint, or other commercial profits does not change or influence editorial decisions. • Our articles are peer reviewed to guarantee excellence in our publications. Method of Handling Unethical Conduct: Recognition of Unethical Conduct • When identified, misconduct and unethical actions must be reported to the editor and publisher. • Misconduct and unethical actions include, but are not limited to, examples outlined above, such as plagiarism or misrepresentation of the research. • The informer of unethical conduct must offer adequate information and proof in order to launch an investigation. All allegations must be seriously considered and treated in a similar fashion, until an appropriate outcome or agreement is achieved. Investigation • The editor is responsible to choose the appropriate manner of investigation and may seek advice from the editorial board, the academic committee, or the reviewer when making this choice. • Evidence must be collected in a way that avoiding inflaming the situations and proliferating allegations. Castigation (in increasing order of severity; may be administered separately or in conjunction) • • • • •

Notifying the author or reviewer of a misunderstanding or misapplication of the journal’s ethical standards in their article. Writing a strongly worded letter or statement to the author’s reviewer expressing the unethical behavior and issuing a warning. Publishing a formal remark with details of the inappropriate behavior. Publishing an editorial comment detailing the inappropriate behavior. Formally withdrawing and removing the work under question from the journal, in conjunction with notifying: the supervisor of the author or the reviewer’s department, the Abstracting and Indexing groups, and the audience of the publication. Enforcing a formal embargo on submissions from the author for a set period of time.

This statement is based on COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors ( and Elsevier recommendations.