Code of conduct
The Studia Historica Nitriensia journal (hereinafter referred to as SHN) is published by the Constantine the Philosopher University. The address of the editorial office is the Department of History of the Philosophical Faculty of the Constantine the Philosopher University in Nitra, Hodžova 1, 949 01 Nitra. The current editor-in-chief is assoc. prof. Mgr. Miroslav Palárik, PhD. The journal publishes original contributions dealing with history, archaeology, museology. The role of the editorial board is to guarantee the highest quality of the published texts, their originality and prevent breaching the authorship ethics. The rules below follow from the rules of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) http://publicationethics.org/resources/gudelines
1. The role of the editor-in-chief
The editor-in-chief makes the primary editing decision, i. e. they do preliminary evaluation of the contributions delivered to the editorial office, their compatibility with the topic of the journal, as well as their suitability for reviewing process. The contributions which do not correspond with the topic of the journal, do not meet the primary criteria for scholarly articles and evidently breach the principles of publication ethics are denied. The editor-in-chief discusses disputable cases with the members of the scientific board of the journal. They can ask the authors to make necessary changes in the submitted articles, e. g. shortening, rewriting footnotes in accordance with the authorship guide, adopting the figures to the publication and economic conditions of the journal. The editor-in-chief has the final word in editing individual issues of the journal.
2. The role of the editorial board
The editorial board of the SHN journal comprises:
a) the scientific board of the journal
b) wider editorial circle.
Members of the journal’s scientific board are renowned experts and authorities in the fields of history, archaeology and museology from Slovakia as well as other countries. The wider editorial circle comprises experts who are preferably requested to review articles. The scientific board of the journal decides on publishing of the contribution in the journal if it passes the reviewing process successfully. Deciding on publishing or not publishing, the scientific board of the journal follows from the reviews elaborated by the reviewers. In their decisions, the scientific board regards generally accepted ethical principles and academic practice. On the website, the scientific board publishes the ethical principles, principles of the reviewing process and instructions for authors which are essential in their decisions. If necessary, the scientific board can update the norms. The articles in the section of studies, perspectives, materials and discussion are subject to language editing. The scientific board provides publishing corrections, reactions from the scientific community, or possible apologies on the pages of the journal, in case of breaching the publication ethics.
3. The role of the editorial board
The editorial board observes the anonymity of authors, reviews and confidentiality of the correspondence between the author and the board. The board does not accept paid commercial contributions or advertisements, with the exception of notes on new publications related to the topics of the SHN journal published by the journal’s publisher. The board monitors possible conflicts of interest among authors, reviewers and members of the scientific board of the journal or its wider editorial circle.
4. The process of reviewing the submitted manuscripts
After the submitted manuscripts have been primarily classified by the editor-in-chief, they are assigned to two reviewers. The scientific board decides on the reviewers. If the reviewer is chosen outside the scientific board or the wider editorial circle, the publication principles of the SHN journal shall be sent to them together with the article. The articles are anonymous and assigned to two, in case of coliding reviews three, reviewers. The authors and reviewers remain anonymous to each other during the whole process. The editorial board uses a review form in which the reviewers comment on the following:
1. the content, expert and scientific level of the text;
2. style and form.
The reviewer can recommend the text for publishing, suggest modifications, or reject publishing. If it is necessary to modify the article or it is rejected, the reviewer must clearly justify their decisions. Contribution which is to be substantially modified, must be re-assessed by reviewers. The reviewers must inform the editorial board if the article has been published in another journal/monograph, or it is wholly or partially copied or the information it contains is manipulated. This also applies to other language editions of the article. The reviewer can refuse to review the assigned study but must inform the editorial board immediately. The reviewer must be unbiased judging the reviewed articles, inoffensive to the author of the reviewed article. If one of the reviewers recommends the article for publication and the other one refuses it, the editorial board provides a third, conciliation review elaborated by an expert. In such case, the editor-in-chief and the scientific board of the journal have the final word. All articles published in the journal must successfully pass the reviewing process, otherwise they cannot be published. Articles published in the Chronicle, Reviews and Annotation sections are exceptions; the editor-in-chief decides on publishing without the reviewing process. If the author wants to publish a review of their colleague’s work, they must inform the editorial board as soon as it has been delivered to the address of the editorial board. All reviewers must consider the content of the reviewed manuscripts confidential, they shall not abuse or use any of the articles’ parts in their own works before these articles are published, they must declare the name of the author.
5. Author’s Ethics
The author is obligated to submit an original unpublished article based on their own archive or resource research. Submitting an article which has been published before (including other language editions) is considered unethical. Considerably rewritten or completed articles are acceptable. The author must state such information in footnotes and specify where the original article was published. The authors do not need to ask the editorial board for permission to further publish their own texts in monographs after they have been published on pages of the SHN journal. The author must not publish the same article in another journal after it has been published in the SHN journal. Writing the text, the author must observe the ethical principles which ensure that no part of the text or the whole text are copied and they must not manipulate the results of their research. Writing the text, the author must observe the instructions for authors published on the SHN journal’s webpage in Slovak or English as well as in the printed version of the journal. The author is obligated to prove their authorization to use materials protected by copyright if asked by the editorial board.