Publication ethics

The editorial board of Universitas Gedanensis applies the highest ethical and publication standards, in accordance with the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The aim is to ensure the reliability of scientific research, counteract dishonest publication practices, and protect the credibility of the journal.

1. General principles

All articles are reviewed for compliance with publishing ethics, including the prevention of plagiarism, self-plagiarism, data fabrication, manipulation of results, and ghost authorship.
The criteria for accepting articles for publication are: scientific value, originality of approach, clarity of argument, and consistency with the journal's profile.
The review procedure is double-blind peer review—neither the authors nor the reviewers know each other's identities.

2. Responsibilities of the Editorial Board

Members of the editorial board ensure compliance with ethical standards and prevent practices that are inconsistent with them.
The decision to publish an article is based solely on its substantive value, not on the author's origin, views, or affiliation.
The editorial board ensures the confidentiality of the editorial process. Unpublished articles may not be used by members of the editorial board or other persons involved in the publishing process.
In the event of ethical violations (plagiarism, data falsification, duplicate publication, dishonest authorship), the editorial board has the right to reject or withdraw an article even after publication.
The editorial board publishes corrections, explanations, or apologies if scientific integrity so requires.

3. Authors' responsibilities

Authors are required to present their research results in a reliable, transparent, and verifiable manner.
Texts submitted for publication must be original. Any borrowings should be properly cited.
It is unacceptable to submit the same article to several journals at the same time or to publish the same research in more than one place without the publisher's consent.
Authors must indicate the sources of research funding and potential conflicts of interest.
In the case of multi-author works, the contribution of each author should be specified in order to exclude ghostwriting and guest authorship.
Authors are required to immediately report any errors detected after publication and to cooperate in their correction.

4. Reviewers' responsibilities

Reviewers are required to prepare reviews in a timely manner and to immediately inform the editorial office if they are unable to complete the task.
The review process is confidential—reviewers may not disclose the content of the article or use it for their own benefit.
Reviews should be objective and constructive, free of personal comments about the authors.
Reviewers should point out substantive deficiencies, relevant publications omitted by the author, and any suspicions of plagiarism or scientific dishonesty.
A reviewer may not evaluate an article if there is a conflict of interest with the author (shared affiliation, personal relationships, professional dependencies).

5. Retraction of publications

The editorial board has the right to retract an article from publication if:

plagiarism, self-plagiarism, or other ethical violations are detected,
the research results prove to be unreliable or fabricated,
there are methodological or factual errors,
an unauthorized change of authorship or ghost authorship is reported,
evidence of an undisclosed conflict of interest emerges.

The withdrawal of a publication will be marked in the electronic and paper versions, along with the reasons for the withdrawal.

Any violation of publication ethics may be reported to the editorial board.