Ethical principles which are followed in the “Architectus” journal.

The journal has adopted the principle sof publication ethics that are consistent with the guidelines of the Committee for Publication Ethics (COPE). COPE.PDF.

  1. Principles and duties concerning the scientific council and editorial team:

    • preventing practices which are inconsistent with the standards in force in science
    • responsibility for deciding whether to qualify an article for publication (the criteria for accepting articles for publication are as follows: compliance with the thematic scope of the journal and with ethical principles in force in science, opinion of reviewers, scientific value of the article, originality of the problem, transparency and logic of the argument, scientific workshop of the authors)
    • being guided at work with honesty, diligence and objectivity as well as substantive considerations, without discrimination on the basis of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious and political beliefs, geographical or cultural origin of the authors
    • respecting confidentiality, not disclosing to unauthorized persons any information about the works submitted to the journal
    • striving to maintain the highest possible scientific accuracy and being ready to publish corrections, amendments and apologies, if there is a justified need to do so
    • counteracting conflicts of interest (non-use of unpublished articles by anyone associated with the publishing process without the written consent of the authors).
  2. The rules for authors:

    • ensuring the originality of the work (only authors’ own unpublished texts may be submitted for publication; research by other scientists used in the work must be clearly marked as a citation with the source; plagiarism and fabrication of data are unacceptable)
    • maintaining scientific integrity (making every effort to describe the research performed and the objective interpretation of the results in the best possible way; ghostwriting and guestauthorship are unacceptable manifestations of scientific misconduct and will be exposed as such; reliability of sources– the obligation to mention other works used in the writing of the article in the bibliography)
    • guarantee of the authorship of the work (in multi-author works, disclosure of the contribution of individual authors in their creation – not percentage, but substantive; the obligation of authors submitting the article to ensure that the other authors accept the final version of the work) counteracting conflicts of interest (authors should not publish texts describing the same research in more than one journal)
    • informing the editorial office of any possible conflicts of interest
    • readiness to notify the editorial office of the journal in the event of discovering errors or inaccuracies in the article and for possible errata or even withdrawal of the article.
  3. The rules for reviewers:

    • confidentiality (the texts of articles and their reviews are confidential, and their disclosure to unauthorized persons / not participating in the publishing process is unacceptable)
    • objectivity (substantive evaluation of the text; personal criticism of the authors is unacceptable; all comments should be properly argued)
    • counteracting conflicts of interest (using the peer-reviewed papers for your own purposes and for your own benefit is unacceptable; if the reviewer discovers the possibility of a conflict of interest, she/he is obliged to inform the editors about it)
    • reliability (in the event of any significant similarities between the reviewed article and other papers, the reviewer should inform the editors about it; it is also advisable – if necessary – to mention relevant important papers not quoted by the author and related to the subject of the article)
    • punctuality (obligation to provide a review within a predetermined period or inform the editorial office of any changes in this respect or the impossibility of fulfilling the entrusted task).