DIEM is published by the University of Dubrovnik. Aiming to improve the overall quality of the journal, the publisher has established these guidelines:
Improving Publication Ethics
The editor will actively seek the views of authors, readers, reviewers and the editorial board about ways of improving the journal. The editor will support initiatives to reduce academic misconduct and to educate researchers about publication ethics. Journal policies will be revised if required, taking into account the new findings in the field of journalology and the effects of journal policies on authors’ and reviewers’ behavior.
The editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. Decisions are driven by quality and the importance of the article to researchers and readers. In making decisions the editor may consult reviewers and the editorial board.
The editor evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors. Submissions to the journal authored by the editor, the employees of the publisher and the editorial board will be handled in such way as to ensure unbiased reviews.
The editor and the editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
a) Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in the editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author.
b) Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
c) The editor should recuse her/himself from considering manuscripts in which he/she has conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
d) The editor should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern.
Involvement and Cooperation in Investigations
The editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher. Such measures will generally include contacting the authors of the manuscript or published paper and giving due consideration to the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies, and if the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant. Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.
THE EDITORIAL BOARD
The publisher will establish a suitably qualified editorial board whose members can actively contribute to the development and good management of the journal. The functions and duties of the editorial board members are: supporting and promoting the journal, pre‐ reviewing and reviewing submissions to the journal, seeking out the best authors and best work and actively encouraging submissions, accepting commissions to write editorials, reviews and commentaries on papers in their specialist area, attending and contributing to the editorial board meetings. The editor is obliged to: consult the editorial board at least once a year to gauge their opinions about the running of the journal, inform them of any changes to the policies of the journal and identify future challenges.
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, editorial opinion works should be clearly identified as such.
Data Access and Retention
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
Originality and Plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that the citations or quotations are accurately conveyed. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others.
Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
The authors should not submit for publication manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper. Publication of some kinds of articles (e.g. translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.
Acknowledgement of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be made. The authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.
Authorship of the Paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co‐authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co‐authors and no inappropriate coauthors are included on the paper, and that all co‐authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed as influencing the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.
Fundamental Errors in Published Works
When the authors discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it is their obligation to promptly notify the editor or the publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the authors promptly to retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the authors may also assist the authors in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. The
journal shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. The reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgement of Sources
The reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. The reviewers should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. The reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have 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 review process involves a double-blind review, which means that the identity of both the reviewer and author are concealed from each other throughout the process. lf by any chance a reviewer becomes aware of the identity of the author(s), he/she should inform the Editor in Chief immediately.
A reviewer who discovers or suspects plagiarism should inform the Editor in Chief immediately. Reviewers should maintain their objectivity and professionalism during the review process. Reviewers who feel insufficiently competent to review the paper or would not be able to give feedback in proper time should promptly excuse themselves from the review process. Reviewers should not discuss reviewed papers with anyone except with Editor in Chief.
The journal will adopt procedures for detecting plagiarism in submitted items, both routinely and especially when suspicions are raised. The authors whose copyright has been breached or who have been the victims of plagiarism will gain support from the journal. The journal will take actions in accordance with Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE: http://publicationethics.org/).
The journal will ensure that commercial considerations do not affect editorial decisions. Income sources by which the Journal is co‐financed are publicly available on its website.
Ensuring the Integrity of the Academic Record
The publisher will ensure that published material is securely archived.
AII submitted research papers and articles will be checked for originality using a solution from our partner Turnitin.
lf you suspect that compliance with any ethical principle might be compromised by any stakeholder, please contact us at firstname.lastname@example.org