The editorial board of the Slovak Anthropology journal is responsible for the principles of publishing ethics and the quality of published papers, as well.  It is important to agree upon standards of the bellow listed ethical behaviour for all parties involved in the act of publishing.

Authorship of the paper and duties of authors

  • The authors should ensure that they have submitted an original article that has not been published previously. In case of submission of a supplemented manuscript (secondary publication), authors should specify all the additional information that has been made and cite the primary reference in the secondary publication.
  • The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted and permission has been obtained where necessary. The references are cited according to the editorial guidelines of the Slovak Anthropology Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical behaviour and is unacceptable.
  • The authors who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study should be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
  • When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper if deemed necessary by the editor.
  • When the materials used in the article are subject to copyright, the authors should prove that they a permission for its use.
  • If the work involves the use of human subjects, the editors may require a confirmation that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.
  • All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial and personal relationships with other people or organizations that could be viewed as inappropriately influencing (bias) their work. The authors will provide a complete list of sources of project funding.
  • The authors are entitled to appeal against the decision of the Editors. The issues raised are discussed under the rules of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) published on the website

Review process and duties of reviewers

  • Papers submitted for publication are reviewed by two reviewers. The choice of reviewers is under the responsibility of the Editors. The reviewer cannot be a member of the workplace of any of the authors of the peer-reviewed paper.
  • The review process is anonymous (blind peer review), so authors and reviewers remain anonymous to each other.
  • Reviewers complete a standardized form, write comments on the quality, originality, and contribution of the paper in the issue. Reviewers submit overall evaluation whether the submission is recommended for acceptance, revision, or rejection.
  • Reviews should be conducted objectively and confidentially and provided only to the authors and the editors for the final decision of the submitted manuscript.
  • The reviewer should not have any conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
  • The reviewer should point out if he/she knows that a similar paper has already been published in another journal, or the article does not include relevant references.
  • The reviewer announces disagreement with his/her nomination so that the editors can elect another competent reviewer.

Duties of the Editorial Board

  • If the submission does not correspond with the journal scope, the editors have full responsibility and the right to reject the paper in the review process.
  • Due to the recommendations of the reviewers, the editorial board has a full right to decide whether to accept or reject the article.
  • The editors cannot consent to the publication of an unrelieved paper or a paper that has not been successfully reviewed. Only informative contributions, reviews, and reports may be published without a review process.
  • The editors must not be involved in the decisions about the papers which they have written themselves. Further, any such submission must be subject to all of the journal’s usual procedures, peer review must be handled independently of the relevant author/editor.
  • The editorial board is in charge of following the principles of publishing ethics.
  • The editorial board guarantees the contributions comply with internationally recognized ethical principles and academic practices.
  • The editorial board protects the confidentiality of all material submitted to the journal and all communications with reviewers unless otherwise agreed with the relevant authors and reviewers. Unless the journal is operating an open peer-review system and/or reviewers have agreed to disclose their names, the editor must protect reviewers’ identities.
  • Members of the Editorial Board ensure the monitoring and safeguarding of the Journal’s publication ethics. This comprises the strict policy on plagiarism and fraudulent data, the strong commitment to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed, and the strict preclusion of business needs from compromising intellectual and ethical standards. Whenever it is recognised that a published paper contains a significant inaccuracy, misleading statement or distorted report, it will be corrected promptly. If, after an appropriate investigation, an item proves to be fraudulent, it will be retracted. The retraction will be clearly identifiable to readers and indexing systems.