The ethics and malpractice statement

Forum Scientiae Oeconomia is a peer-reviewed journal. The following statement presents the ethical behaviour of all parties involved in the process of publishing articles for this journal.

Ethical Guidelines for Authors

When you submit a paper to Forum Scientiae Oeconomia, you are confirming that you have read these ethical guidelines, agree to the contents and have taken any appropriate actions.

The ethical principles have been developed based on:

- the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE),

- the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors,

- COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers,

- the study: Good Practices in Reviewing Procedures,

- ethical principles applicable in other scholarly journals.

Open access

The journal offers open access to the contents based on the principles of the non-exclusive license Creative Commons (CC BY 4.0).

Content

By submitting a paper to Forum Scientiae Oeconomia, it is understood that all authors have thereby declared that they have read and agree on the content of the submitted paper. 

Ethics

Submissions may be rejected by the Editorial Office if it is felt that the work was not carried out within an ethical framework. Forum Scientiae Oeconomia published by WSB University adheres to the principles outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (https://publicationethics.org/) and follows their guidelines in respect of publication ethics and managing problems when they arise.

Competing/conflicting interests 

Authors are obliged to declare all potential competing interests involving people or organisations that might reasonably be perceived as relevant. 

Publication fee

Forum Scientiae Oeconomia is an open access quarterly scientific journal, available free of charge.

Plagiarism 

Plagiarism in any form constitutes a serious violation of the principles of scholarship and is not acceptable. Examples of plagiarism include: 

1. Word-for-word copying of portions of another's writing without enclosing the copied passage in quotation marks and acknowledging the source in the appropriate scholarly convention.
2. The use of a particularly unique term or concept without acknowledging the original author or source.
3. The paraphrasing or abbreviated restatement of someone else's ideas without acknowledging that another person's text has been the basis for the paraphrasing.
4. False citation: material should not be attributed to a source from which it has not been obtained.
5. False data: data that has been fabricated or altered in a laboratory or experiment; although not factually plagiarism, this is clearly a form of academic fraud.
6. Unacknowledged multiple authors or collaboration: the contributions of each author or collaborator should be made clear.
7. Self-plagiarism/double submission: the submission of the same or a very similar paper to two or more publications.

Publication and authorship

1. All published papers should be in accordance with the thematic scope of the journal, which includes the following areas: the global economy and finance, organisational theory, the development and restructuring of organisations, strategic management, marketing, HRM, innovation and entrepreneurship, CSR and business ethics.
2. All submitted papers are subject to a strict peer-reviewing process by at least two independent reviewers who are experts in the area of the particular paper.
3. All papers published in the journal are written in English.
4. Any form of scientific fraud and the infringement of intellectual property rights will be disclosed.

Authors' responsibilities

1. Authors must guarantee that their manuscripts are their original work. The authors of the work should provide an accurate description of the work performed and an objective discussion of its impact. The underlying data should be accurately presented in the work. The work should contain sufficient details and references to allow others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable. Articles in reviews and professional publications should also be accurate and objective, and "opinion" editorials should be clearly marked as such. Authors should make sure they have written completely original work, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that they have been properly cited. Plagiarism takes many forms, from "passing off" someone else's work as one's own, to copying or paraphrasing significant portions of someone else's work (without attributing authorship), to citing research done by others. Plagiarism in all forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
2. Authors must guarantee that their manuscripts have not been previously published elsewhere.
3. Authors must guarantee that their manuscripts are not currently being considered for publication elsewhere.  
4. Authors must guarantee that their manuscripts have been submitted with the full knowledge and approval of the Institutions given as the affiliation of the authors.
5. All Authors mentioned in the paper must have significantly contributed to the research.
6. Authors must identify all sources used in the preparation of their manuscript. Authors may be asked to provide raw data connected with a paper and should be prepared to provide public access to such data if feasible, and in any case should be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
7. If an author discovers a material error or inaccuracy in his or her own published article, it is the author's responsibility to immediately notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with him or her to withdraw or correct the paper. If the editor or publisher learns from a third party that the published article contains a material error, it is the author's responsibility to withdraw or correct the paper immediately or provide the editor with evidence of the correctness of the original work.
8. Authors assign copyright or license the publication rights in their articles, including abstracts, to WSB University.
9. The journal offers open access to content under a non-exclusive Creative Commons license (CC BY 4.0). Thus, authors are required to agree to this policy. Accordingly, authors will be asked to fill out a submission sheet along with an agreement that details the transfer of copyright.
10. In accordance with the Data Protection Law, if an article is rejected, all electronic submissions will be deleted from the publication system, and submissions will be removed from the publisher's records and destroyed.

 Reviewers' responsibilities

1. Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat it as privileged.
2. Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. Any kind of similarity between the manuscript and another published paper must be immediately brought to the attention of the Editor-in-Chief.
3. Reviewers should be independent experts with no conflict of interest and relationships with any of the authors or institutions connected to the papers.
4. Reviews should be conducted objectively, and the reviewers should express their views clearly with the supporting arguments and with no personal criticism of the author.
5. In case the reviewer feels that it is not possible to complete the review process, he/she must inform the Editor-in-Chief immediately so the manuscript may be sent to any other reviewer.

Editors’ responsibility

The members of the Editorial and Scientific Boards of Forum Scientiae Oeconomia are recognised experts in their fields. Their full names and affiliations are provided on the journal’s Web site in the Editorial Team and Editorial Board section. The contact information for the editorial office is provided on the journal’s website in the Contact section.

1. The Editor-in-Chief has full responsibility and authority to reject an article at the stage of desk evaluation.
2. The Editor-in-Chief must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated. The editor may reject it out of hand either because it does not deal with the subject matter for that journal or because it is manifestly of such low quality that it cannot be considered for publication. After passing this evaluation, the manuscript is then forwarded to at least two reviewers for blind peer-review. Each of them will make a recommendation to accept/reject or modify the reviewed manuscript.
3. Based on the review, the Editor-in-Chief has the right to accept or reject the manuscript or send it for modification.
4. The Editor-in-Chief must ensure that each manuscript is reviewed for its intellectual content.
5. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the content and overall quality of the publication.
6. The information obtained in the process of evaluating papers, as well as rejected articles or their excerpts, may not be used by the editors or reviewers in their own research without the express written consent of the author.
7. The editors do not appoint persons in a relationship of direct professional subordination or other direct personal relations with the authors of texts to act as reviewers of these texts.
8. The Editor-in-Chief is obliged to comply with current legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
9. The Editor-in-Chief must ensure that information regarding the manuscript is kept confidential. Any information about a submitted manuscript should not be disclosed to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher. Editors should ensure that material submitted remains confidential while under review.
10. The Editor-in-Chief should preserve the anonymity of reviewers and authors during the review process.
11. Theme editors should guarantee the quality of the papers and the integrity of the academic record.
12. Theme editors should base their decisions solely on the importance, originality, and clarity of the papers and their relevance to the scope of the publication.
13. Editors should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political views of the authors. Editors´ decision to accept or reject a paper for publication should be based only on the importance, originality and clarity of the paper, and the relevance of the paper to the aim of the journal.
14. Theme editors should act if they suspect misconduct and make all reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem. Editors should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher. Every reported act of unethical publishing behaviour must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.
15. Theme editors should not allow any conflicts of interest between staff, authors, reviewers and board members. Editors should recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers. Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication.
16. The final decision on the publication of a manuscript is taken by the Editor-in-Chief.
17. The editors ensure that the journal's website, along with the text contained therein, demonstrates that efforts have been made to ensure high ethical and professional standards.