Principles of publication ethics

All parties involved in the publication process (Authors, Reviewers, Scientific Council, Editorial Committee) are required to adhere to the principles of publication ethics. Architecture and Urban planning Quarterly follows the guidelines developed by the Committee on Publications Ethics (COPE; cf. https://publicationethics.org/core-practices)

Scientific Council and Editorial Committee

The Scientific Council and Editorial Committee ensure that publication ethics and standards of scientific integrity and honesty are adhered to at every stage of the journal's development.

The Editorial Committee decides on the eligibility of an article for publication on the basis of merit without regard to the gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, race, ethnicity, citizenship or political views of the author(s).

The Scientific Council and the Editorial Committee are guided by the principle of confidentiality and do not disclose information about a submitted article to unauthorised persons. The persons authorised to have this information are only: the authors of the individual articles, the reviewers appointed to evaluate the individual articles, the Scientific Council and the Editorial Committee.

The Editorial Committee prevents any kind of conflict of interest, understood as being in a relationship of subordination or superordination with the author of a given text or in any other direct personal or professional relationship, which could result in a lack of impartiality when reviewing the text or deciding whether it should be accepted for publication.

The Editorial Committee does not get involved in reviewing or deciding whether to accept its own papers for publication.

The Editorial Committee shall not use submitted articles for its own purposes and benefit in a manner inconsistent with the principles of publication ethics and standards of scientific integrity and honesty.

The Editorial Committee mediates between the author and the reviewer in a blind peer review process. The Editorial Committee guarantees anonymity for both parties to the process.

The Editorial Committee shall inform the author(s) of the decision to accept or refuse the text for publication, giving reasons for the decision to refuse the text for publication.

The Editorial Committee undertakes to publish polemics with previously published articles and responses to polemics, provided that they comply with the ethical requirements and the substantive requirements of scientific debate.

The Editorial Committee responds to any illegal or unethical activity related to the preparation of the publication or the review process, following COPE guidelines. In justified cases, an article may be withdrawn. Documented serious instances of scientific dishonesty (such as falsification and fabrication of data, plagiarism, self-plagiarism, ghostwriting, guest authorship/honorary authorship) The Editorial Committee will notify the appropriate parties, including the relevant law enforcement authorities and the disciplinary authorities of the scientific unit in which the author/author is affiliated.

Reviewers

The reviewers make a fair assessment of the articles solely on the basis of merit, without being guided by their own views or prejudices.

The reviewers make their comments in a clear, comprehensive and unambiguous manner. If necessary, they indicate changes to improve the content of the text and/or to supplement the sources of the information provided and/or the clarity of the argument. Subjective comments and personal criticism are not acceptable.
The reviewers are guided by the principle of confidentiality and communicate about the assessed articles only with the Editorial Committee.

Reviewers do not use the peer-reviewed articles for their own purposes and benefit in a way that is incompatible with the principles of publication ethics and standards of scientific integrity and honesty.

If a reviewer perceives a potential conflict of interest, he/she is obliged to withdraw from the review process. In this case, the article will be forwarded to another reviewer for assessment.

The reviewers are obliged to inform the Editorial Committee of any perceived manifestation of scientific dishonesty (such as falsification and fabrication of data, plagiarism, self-plagiarism, ghostwriting, guest authorship/honorary authorship) or violation of the accepted Principles of Publishing Ethics.

Authors

Authors submit only their own articles for publication, not submitted for publication in other publications.

The authors do not infringe the copyright of others. Where reference is made to the research of others, they use appropriate markings (footnotes and citations).

The authors declare that they have secured reproduction rights for the illustrative material.

Publication of copyright-protected material is possible provided that the authors provide the prior consent of the right holders.

The authors disclose the participation of all persons involved in the article.

The authors report on the sources of funding and contributions to the publication by others.

Authors are obliged to provide any explanation in the event of any a breach of publishing ethics and/or standards of scientific integrity and honesty.

If errors are discovered, if publication ethics or standards of scientific integrity and honesty are violated, authors are obliged to notify the Editorial Committee immediately in order to correct or withdraw the article.
The authors are obliged to co-operate with the Editorial Committee with regard to changes and corrections suggested in the review and editorial drafting. They have the right to polemicise against the proposals contained in the review and the editorial, remaining free to take comments into account. However, failure to comply with reviewer and editorial comments may result in refusal of publication.