PUBLICATION ETHICS AND MALPRACTICE STATEMENT. ETHICAL GUIDELINES

The ethical policy of Acta Scientiarum Polonorum Administratio Locorum follows the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (http://publicationethics.org/). The submitted manuscripts should comply with the guidelines for authors and should be processed in accordance with the guidelines for journal editors and reviewers (presented below). Please note that the presented guidelines are not exhaustive, and authors should adhere to local regulations and standards that apply to scientific publications in their countries.

Authors' responsibilities:

• The research presented in an article should be described in detail to enable an independent research team to repeat the study.
• All persons who have contributed to the research (conducted the study or wrote the manuscript) should be included in the list of authors or the acknowledgements section, and their contributions and roles should be explained. Ghost-writing and guest authorship are prohibited (refer to the below description).
• The submitted manuscript should be completely original. When quoting the work or the words of other authors, all sources should be properly cited. Plagiarism and self-plagiarism are not tolerated by the journal.
• The submitted manuscript should include a statement of originality to warrant that the paper has not been previously published (under the same or alternative title, and that it is not a part of another publication) and that it does not infringe upon a third party's copyright. The statement of originality is a part of the submission process (https://czasopisma.uwm.edu.pl/index.php/aspal/about/submissions).
• If any content is reproduced from other sources, the authors should request permission from copyright owners before submitting the article.
• The manuscript should be prepared for double-blind peer review, where both parties remain anonymous throughout the review process. The authors should not reveal their identity to the reviewers, including in the citations or the metadata of the submitted files. A blinded manuscript (including references, figures, tables, and any acknowledgements) should not include any identifying information, such as the authors' names or affiliations. The authors should use third-person pronouns to refer to their previous work. For example, phrases such as “as we have shown before” should be replaced with “as has been shown before [Anonymous, 2007]”. Previous research should also be blinded in the reference list: “[Anonymous 2007] Details omitted for double-blind reviewing”. The above also applies to funding sources.
• Any chemicals, procedures or equipment that were used to conduct the presented research should be mentioned and described in the article.
• Funding sources for the conducted research should be described at the end of the manuscript.
• Information about potential conflicts of interest which could affect the interpretation of the obtained results should be provided in the article.
• If a significant error or inaccuracy is found in an article that has already been published, the authors should immediately notify the journal to retract the article or publish an appropriate erratum.

Detailed guidelines for the authors: PDF.

Reviewers' responsibilities:

• All manuscripts submitted to the journal and forwarded for review are confidential, and may not be shared with third parties or used for personal gain.
• The reviewer should immediately notify the journal's editor if she/he is unable to review the submitted manuscript because she/he: (1) does not feel competent to review the submitted article; (2) is unable to complete the review on time; (3) has a conflict of interest regarding the article (arising from competition, collaboration, or other relationships with the authors or institutions related to the manuscript).
• The manuscript should be reviewed objectively and constructively, without any personal criticism of the authors or their work.
• The review should be written in a clear manner, with the use of the appropriate arguments to back every statement, to help the authors improve their manuscript and assist the editor in the decision-making process.
• If the reviewer is familiar with any significant research that has been published by other scientists, but was not cited in the reviewed article, the reviewer should recommend to the authors that such research be referenced in the article.
• The reviewer should notify the journal if the reviewed work is significantly similar to other previously published research.
• The manuscript should be reviewed under the double-blind peer review process, where both parties remain anonymous throughout the process. The reviewer should not reveal his/her identity to the authors, including in the comments or the metadata of the reviewed files.

Detailed guidelines for peer reviewers: PDF.

Editors' responsibilities:

• To prevent scientific misconduct, the Editorial Board has adopted specific procedures dealing with “Ghost-writing”, “Guest Authorship”, “Plagiarism” and “Self-plagiarism”:

1. Ghost-writing: an individual makes a substantial contribution to a publication without being listed as one of the authors or without being mentioned in the acknowledgments section.
2. Guest Authorship or Honorary Authorship: one or more authors are mentioned as significant contributors to a work, whereas their actual contribution was insignificant.
3. Plagiarism: the practice of using someone else’s work without giving them proper credit.
4. Self-plagiarism: the practice of reusing previously published own work without acknowledging the source.

• The editors decide which of the submitted articles should be included in the editorial process and, subsequently, published. The editors may consult other editors, members of the Editorial Board, and reviewers.
• The manuscripts should be evaluated objectively, without any personal criticism of the authors.
• Any information about the submitted articles should be regarded as confidential and disclosed only to the authors, reviewers, other editors, members of the Editorial Board, and the publisher.
• Manuscripts submitted to the journal may not be used for personal gain.
• The editor should provide a fair review process and avoid any conflict of interest regarding the article (arising from competition, collaboration, or other relationships with the authors or institutions related to the manuscript).
• The editor should aim to ensure the scientific credibility of articles by preventing economic considerations from affecting the publishing process.
• Any information from the reviewers or the editors concerning suspicions of plagiarism or ethical problems regarding the submitted article should be investigated.
• If a significant error or inaccuracy is found in an article that has already been published, the editors should be ready to publish clarifications, corrections, or apologies.

• According to the Polish Press Law (Journal of Laws of 2018, item 1914), the Editor-in-Chief is personally responsible for all content published in the Journal.

Publisher's responsibilities:

• The publisher should cooperate with the journal's Editorial Board and take the appropriate and possible actions to resolve alleged or proven scientific misconduct (by making changes in published articles, publishing an appropriate erratum, or retracting the manuscript).

Research ethics – the Editorial Board reserves the right to reject any submissions that do not meet the following requirements:

• Borders and territories:

1. The Journal stays neutral to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Potential disputes or complaints over borders and territories or correspondence addresses are respected by the Editorial Board which will attempt to find solutions that are satisfactory to the parties to the dispute.

• Research involving human subjects:
  1. The authors must declare that the ethical principles of research involving human subjects, materials, tissues or data comply with the Declaration of Helsinki.
  2. Before conducting the research, the authors are required to obtain the approval of an institutional ethics committee to confirm that the study meets national and international guidelines and standards. Alternatively, the authors should cite legislative provisions indicating that an ethics approval is not required for the undertaken research.
  3. The manuscript should contain the following ethical statement: “All subjects gave their informed consent for inclusion before they participated in the study. The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and the protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of XXX (Project identification code, date of approval).”
  4. Individuals participating in non-intervention studies (such as surveys, questionnaires, social media research) must be fully informed whether their anonymity will be assured and to what extent, why the research is being conducted, how their data will be used, and whether the research entails any risks. The participants' personal information should not be included unless identifiable materials are of relevance to the research (for example, photographs of the participants’ faces that show a particular symptom), but only after the participants have given their explicit written consent. A template of the consent form must be uploaded with the submission.
  5. The reviewers and the editors will evaluate the ethical acceptability of the research presented in the submitted manuscript, regardless of whether the research had received ethical approval from the competent authorities.
• Research involving clinical trials:
  1. The authors are advised to follow the guidelines of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, in the process of registering clinical trials in a public registry before the first patient enrolment. Suggested databases: gov, the EU Clinical Trials Register, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform.
  2. The authors should attach a CONSORT 2010 Statement and a CONSORT 2020 Flow Diagram (http://www.consort-statement.org/) to the manuscript.
• Research considering sex and gender:
  1. The authors are advised to follow the “Sex and Gender Equity in Research SAGER – guidelines” when sex and gender considerations are relevant.
• Research involving the use of animals:
  1. The authors should follow the Code of Practice for the Housing and Care of Animals Bred, Supplied or Used for Scientific Purposes, The Scientific Basis for Regulation of Animal Care and Use or the EU regulations on animal research and other country-specific legislation or institutional regulations regarding this kind of research.
  2. The authors should follow the ARRIVE guidelines (Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments) and use the Compliance Questionnaire.
  3. If the research caused any harm to animals, the authors must describe the extent to which such harm was justified by the research, the extent to which the animals' welfare was compromised, and the extent to which the described procedures are likely to offend the majority of the readers. 
  4. The authors must describe animal housing conditions, husbandry practices, and pain management during the research.
  5. The authors should replace animals with other alternatives whenever possible, reduce the number of animals used, and refine the experimental conditions and procedures to minimize harm to animals.
  6. If required by country-specific legislation, studies involving vertebrates or higher invertebrates must be approved by a competent ethics committee. The manuscript should contain the following ethical statement: “The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of XXX (Project identification code, date of approval)”, as well as statements on animal welfare that comply with the relevant legislation and regulations.
  7. If the research involved client-owned animals, the owner should be informed about any risks associated with the procedures and the research, and a consent form signed by the owner must be attached to the manuscript.
  8. The reviewers and the editors will evaluate the ethical acceptability of the research presented in the submitted manuscript, regardless of whether the research had received ethical approval from the competent authorities
• Research involving cell lines:
  1. The origin of any cell lines should be described by referring to a published paper or a commercial source.
  2. If any previously unpublished de novocell lines were used, the research must be approved by a competent ethics committee. The manuscript should contain the following ethical statement: “The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of XXX (Project identification code, date of approval)”, including confirmation of written informed consent if the line is of human origin.
• Research involving plants:
  1. Research on plants involving the collection of plant material should follow national or international legislation, as well as institutional standards.
  2. The authors are advised to follow the guidelines of the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Convention on the Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.
  3. Information on genetics and the origin of plant material should be provided in the submitted manuscript. If rare or non-model plants were used, voucher specimens must be described in detail in the manuscript (location of the sampling site, sampling date, parts used in the study) and deposited in an accessible herbarium or museum.