Code of Ethics -
Preventing unfair publication practices, in compliance with the rules established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
Articles submitted to the "Studia Maritima" are verified for compliance with the principles of editorial ethics, reliability and scientific value. They are applicable to the Publisher, Editorial Committee, Author and Reviewers.
Obligations of the Publisher
1. The publisher should observe the confidentiality principle in the publishing and reviewing process.
2. In case of evidence of violation of editorial ethics or evidence indicating the unreliability / falseness of the test results, the publisher is required to withdraw the article from publication.
3. Professional preparation of people involved in the publishing process.
Responsibilities of the Scientific Editor and the Editorial Committee
1. In the respect to accepting texts for publication- Insightful, impartial evaluation of the text submitted for publication on the basis of its scientific value, originality of the recognition of the problem, clarity of the argument and compliance with the profile of the journal (fair play principle)
2. In respect to scientific reliability- The Scientific Editor and the Editorial Committee take care of the scientific integrity of the publication. In order to ensure that, they allow making changes and corrections in the text, publishing corrections, explanations and apologies. They decide to withdraw the published text in the case of:
- Confirmation that the test results are unreliable (due to negligence or deliberate action),
- Publication of research results that have already appeared in print and do not contain relevant annotations on this subject or consent to the citation,
-Plagiarism or violation of ethical standards in the research.
The withdrawn text will not be deleted (also from the electronic version of the journal), but its status will be clearly marked along with the information about the reason for the withdrawal of the text.
3. Regarding the authorship of the submitted article- The Scientific Editor makes sure that all people who contribute to the creation of the article are included in the list of authors and accept the shape of the publication after the scientific editing.
4. In respect to the prevention of the conflicts of interest- any reason that could lead to violation of substantive or ethical standards of the journal should be eliminated. In the case of texts submitted but not accepted for printing, the use of the data contained in them by persons participating in the editorial process may take place only on the basis of the written consent of the Author.
Responsibilities of the Author
1. Scientific reliability- The author submitting the articles for publication is required to accurately describe the tests performed and their objective evaluation, referring to sources and literature in such a way as to enable others to follow the course of research. Providing false, inaccurate data is unethical and may lead to rejection of the text or its withdrawal after it has been published. The author is obliged to include all publications used in the bibliography.
2. Originality- the authors must be aware that plagiarism and false data are unacceptable. They should also follow the scientific standards applicable when referring to the used works and extracting and marking quotes. In order to prevent violation of the rules of ethics, the Author is obliged to sign a statement on submission of the original text for publication.
3. Data sharing- the author is obliged to store for a suitable period after the publication of his article, the data that formed the basis of his research and in the event of such a need to provide access to them at the request of the Editorial Office and eventual publication thereof.
4. Authorship- The text submitted for publication must be signed by all authors, i.e. persons who have made a significant contribution to research at the stage of their conceptualization and planning, implementation and interpretation of results. The authors are obliged to disclose their contribution to the creation of the article. Make sure all co-authors have been included, accepted the final version of the article and agreed to its publication. The text should include thanks for those who performed the work for the Author / Authors. The editorial staff does not accept guest authors or gift authors. The Author / Authors are required to sign the ghostwriting and guest authorship and financial disclosure statements, as well as a statement informing about the contribution of individual authors.
5. Errors in published works. The author is obliged to inform the editors in case he discovers any inaccuracies or errors in his / her text and to cooperate with the Editorial Office in order to make corrections or withdrawal of the text.
6. It is unacceptable to submit the same text in two magazines. The author should be aware that it is also unethical to publish the results of the same research (in part or in whole) in other journals.
Responsibilities of the Reviewers
1. The reviewer reviews an article commissioned by the Scientific Editor. He must be aware that the review is the basis for accepting or rejecting the text. The review will also help the author to make corrections or supplement the text he has submitted for publication.
2. The reviewer is obliged to provide a review within the set deadline. If, due to substantive or other reasons, he cannot do this, he should immediately inform the Editorial Committee and refrain from the review.
3. The reviewer must be aware that every text sent for the review has the status of a confidential document. He cannot show it to third parties or discuss it.
4. Reviews are anonymous. The text must be objectively and reliably reviewed. The reviewer should express his opinions clearly and justify them. Personal criticism of the author of the article is considered inappropriate. The editors do not provide the Author with the data of the Reviewer.
5. The reviewer is obliged to indicate the scientific works that have not been taken into account by the author. The Reviewer is obliged to report to the Editor any noticeable similarity to other, already published results of the research.
6. The reviewer may not review texts in the case of a conflict of interest resulting from cooperation with the author or institutions he represents. It is unethical for the Reviewer to use the information obtained as a result of the review of the text, because it is confidential and cannot be used to achieve personal benefits.
The author’s statements:
The COPE Procedures applicable in case of suspicion of plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabrication of data, changes in the list of authors, ghosting, guest or polite authorship and the manner in which a reviewer / reader / editor suspects a conflict of interest or there is a suspicion for the reviewer's appropriation of the author's ideas or data, as well as the procedure for answering the whistleblowers making their reservations.