Colloquia Theologica Ottoniana is an Open Access journal, which means that all content is available free to users and their institutions. Users are permitted to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts or use them for any other lawful purpose without prior consent from the publishers or authors. This is compliant with the BOAI’s definition of open access. (See source: https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/boai-10-recommendations)
Colloquia Theologica Ottoniana is licensed under Creative Commons-Attribution and Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International Public License (CC BY-SA).
Users are free to engage in any of the following actions:
Under the following terms, users of CTO are permitted these allowances:
(See source: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/)
Detailed license terms and conditions are located here: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode
The journal applies the following identifiers: Digital Object Identifier (DOI) for electronic documents and Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCID) for authors and contributors.
The final decision concerning the text’s publication in CTO is made by the editor-in-chief whose particular obligation is to care for equal treatment of all authors regardless of their sex, race, citizenship, sexual orientation, religious, or philosophical beliefs. The editor-in-chief’s decision is exclusively based on scientific grounds.
The editor-in-chief and the editorial team do not disclose any information concerning the submitted manuscripts to any party except the author, reviewers, potential reviews, publisher, and other editorial advisors. Intellectual property presented in the submitted manuscript is not used by the editor or editorial team for their own research purposes unless it is agreed upon by the author.
The editors make every effort to select expert reviewers on the subject related to the proposed manuscript. Any parties appointed as reviewers who consider themselves incompetent in a given field, or who know that they are not able to meet the task of preparing a review within a given time, should promptly notify the editors.
All texts submitted for review should be treated as confidential by the reviewers. They must be neither disclosed nor discussed with any other parties.
The main task of the reviewer is to verify whether the reviewed work is a scientific text and that it does not contain substantive errors. The review may also contain polemical elements, but they should be decisive for the conclusion of the review only if the polemic reveals the inconsistency of the author.
Reviews should be objective, substantive, and cultural. Any criticism related to the author’s scientific view, philosophical or religious beliefs, which could be loosely interpreted when reading the text, is inappropriate. The criticism should be based on factual arguments only.
Authors are requested to exclusively submit original texts of scientific nature (references, bibliography, proper style, etc.). In general, papers describing the same research should not be published in more than one journal. Submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal is deemed as incompliant with the policy adopted by CTO and unacceptable.
In the event of publication, the authors consent to the publication of their works under the CC-BY-SA license. This license allows other parties to copy, distribute, and transmit the work as well as to adapt the work and to make commercial use of it.
All parties, who significantly contributed to the manuscript, should be mentioned as their co-authors. Authors in contact with the editors shall undertake to ensure that any and all co-authors accept the final version of the manuscript and consent to its publication.
The CTO editors particularly oppose dishonest practices known as ghostwriting (failure to disclose a person who significantly contributed to a publication) and guest authorship (adding a person who hardly contributed to the manuscript as a co-author). Such practices are deemed by the CTO as shameful signs of scientific misconduct.
To avoid such occurrences, the editors have implemented the following procedure:
The above principles have been designed to follow the recommendations made by the COPE Committee on Publication Ethics contained in the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers as well as the "Good practices in scientific reviewing procedures".
What we do if we suspect redundant (duplicate) publication: