Публикационна eтика

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

All the parties involved in the act of publishing (the author, the journal editors, the reviewers and the publisher) should agree upon the standards of expected ethical behavior. Publication ethics statements of the journal are based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and it is expected that the authors, reviewers and editors will abide the best-practice guidelines on ethical behaviour contained therein.

Duties of the Editorial Board:

The editorial board is responsible for promptly organizing the review of all submitted manuscripts and communicating decisions to authors as quickly as possible. Manuscripts are evaluated solely on academic merit—such as originality, clarity, relevance, and contribution to the field—without regard to the authors’ gender, race, ethnicity, political or religious beliefs, or institutional affiliations. Editorial decisions are made independently, without external influence, and the Editor-in-Chief has ultimate authority over the journal’s content and publication timeline.

The editors make sure that at least two subject-matter experts peer-review each paper before it is considered for publication. Final decisions are based on the manuscript’s significance, the reviewers’ feedback, and its compliance with the journal's standards and guidelines. If weaknesses or errors are identified – whether technical, methodological, factual, or related to improper citationth – e editorial board must inform the author and require corrections before publication.

Plagiarism: The journal of the Confucius Institute does not accept plagiarism, whether deliberate or not.  Plagiarism violates the academic publishing principle and includes, but is not limited to, reusing or copying language, concepts, images, or data from other sources without giving due credit.  Confucius Institute uses the University of Veliko Tarnovo's plagiarism detection software to check any manuscripts for text overlap.  If plagiarism is found at any point during the peer review, publication, or post-publication phases, the paper may be rejected, amended, or withdrawn as necessary. We also reserve the right to notify the authors' academic institutions of any plagiarism found.

Confidentiality: Editors and editorial staff are obligated to maintain strict confidentiality regarding all submitted manuscripts. Information or ideas obtained during the review and evaluation process must not be used for personal advantage or disclosed to anyone outside the evaluation process, including authors, reviewers, and publishers. Unpublished material will only be shared with explicit written consent from the authors.

The editorial team is committed to upholding ethical publishing standards. Any conflicts of interest that arise – whether competitive, collaborative, or institutional – must be disclosed, and affected editors must recuse themselves from the review process, delegating the manuscript to another board member. The editors are also prepared to address ethical concerns, misconduct, or complaints about submitted or published work. Appropriate measures such as corrections, retractions, or expressions of concern will be taken when necessary.

Retractions and post-publication corrections: Articles that have been published will be corrected or retracted by publishing a notice that is bidirectionally linked to the original article.  The note will explain any changes made to the original article.  The later correction or retraction will be extensively indexed, while the original piece is still in the public domain.  It could be necessary to remove content from the website if it is deemed to be libelous or to violate specific rights.When authors, readers, or organizations identify mistakes or ethical concerns in a published paper, they are urged to get in touch with the journal as soon as possible.  The editors will take into account every report.

Editors aim to serve both authors and readers by continuously improving the editorial process and ensuring high-quality publications. They actively seek feedback to enhance their practices and consider the interests of all stakeholders when addressing errors or implementing improvements.

Duties of the Reviewers:

In addition to helping the Editorial Board make editorial judgments, peer review can help the author improve their paper through editorial communication.  If an invited referee is unable to examine the research presented in an article or believes they are not qualified to do so, they should promptly inform the journal's board so that other reviewers can be contacted.

Confidentiality: Manuscripts submitted for consideration must be handled with confidentiality. Reviewers should not share or discuss the content of the manuscript with anyone unless explicitly authorized by the journal editor. This confidentiality extends even to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation. Without the authors' express written approval, the reviewer is not permitted to use any sensitive information or ideas they have acquired throughout the peer review process for their own research or for personal benefit.

Objectivity: Reviews ought to be carried out impartially.  It is unacceptable to criticize the author personally.  Referees should clearly state their opinions and provide relevant justifications.

Conflict of interests: Reviewers must promptly notify the editorial team if they feel unqualified to review the manuscript, are unable to provide a timely evaluation, or have conflicts of interest arising from relationships with the authors, institutions, or companies involved in the research. These conflicts should be declared immediately so alternative reviewers can be assigned.

Peer review (done double-blind) is a cornerstone of scholarly communication, providing editors with critical insights for decision-making and offering constructive feedback to authors for improving their manuscripts. Reviews should be objective, detailed, and supported by clear arguments. Personal criticism of authors is inappropriate. Instead, reviewers should focus on assessing the manuscript based on scientific merit, providing constructive suggestions, and ensuring clarity and accuracy.

Reviewers are responsible for identifying unreferenced published work that should be cited and alerting editors to any substantial overlap or duplication between the submitted manuscript and other known works. They must also ensure the correctness of citations and notify the editorial board of any errors or duplication of content with previously published material.

Delays in the review process are unacceptable once a reviewer has agreed to the assignment. Reviewers should provide feedback promptly to avoid disrupting the editorial timeline. All manuscripts should be treated as confidential documents and must not be used for personal benefit under any circumstances, emphasizing the integrity and fairness of the peer review process.

Duties of the Authors:

Reporting standards: All submitted manuscripts should be the result of original research. Authors are expected to present accurate, objective, and unbiased research, ensuring that data, results, and methods comply with scientific and publishing standards. A precise description of the work completed and an unbiased assessment of its importance should be included in the abstract.  The manuscript should appropriately depict the underlying data.

Authorship, originality and plagiarism: Authorship credit should be based on substantial contributions to analysis and interpretation of primary sources and data, to the overview of the secondary literature, and critical revision and final approval of the text to be published. Anyone listed as an author on the title page of an article is expected to have made a significant, direct, intellectual contribution to it. The responsible author should make sure that the author list of the manuscripts includes all suitable co-authors (as defined above) and that no unsuitable co-authors are listed. Additionally, the corresponding author should make sure that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the final version of the article and have consented to its submission for publication.  Every author is required to accept public accountability for the work's content and follow moral publishing guidelines.

The journal follows COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines to handle authorship disputes. Cases of ghostwriting, guest authorship, or honorary authorship are considered unethical and may result in manuscript rejection or retraction.

Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication: It is not appropriate for an author to publish articles that essentially describe the same research in multiple journals or primary publications.  Submitting the same work in parallel to multiple journals is improper and unethical publishing practice.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest: Authors are required to disclose any conflicts of interest that could influence the study’s findings or interpretations. The manuscript should include sufficient details and references to allow replication by others, and fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements are not permitted.

Fundamental errors in published works: Authors should respond promptly to editors’ or reviewers’ queries regarding raw data, clarifications, or copyright permissions. Revisions must be made based on reviewers’ feedback, and corrected manuscripts should be resubmitted in a timely manner. If significant errors or inaccuracies are found in published work, it is the authors’ responsibility to notify the journal and cooperate to correct or retract the paper. Similarly, if a third party reports errors, authors must provide evidence of the work’s accuracy or correct any issues promptly.

Availability of data: Authors must ensure that all data supporting the findings of their research are appropriately documented, accessible, and reproducible. Whenever possible, authors should deposit their datasets in publicly available repositories or provide supplementary materials within the manuscript. A clear statement on data availability must be included in the article, specifying whether the data is openly available, available upon request, or subject to restrictions due to ethical, legal, or confidentiality concerns.

If requested by editors or reviewers, authors should be prepared to provide raw data, analytical methods, and research materials to verify their results. Failure to share data without valid justification may affect the manuscript’s evaluation.

The journal encourages adherence to FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) principles and follows COPE guidelines for handling concerns related to data integrity and transparency.