Copyright 2020 Centrum raně středověkých studií. Všechna práva vyhrazena
Editors strive to meet the needs of readers and authors, ensure the quality of published content, champion freedom of expression and maintain the integrity of academic record.
All research articles published in Convivium have undergone rigorous peer review, based on initial editor screening and anonymized refereeing by at least two anonymous referees coming from different academic background. Editors inform the authors about the process of double-blind peer review evaluation and uphold its objective and fair conduct. Editors ensure that appropriate reviewers are selected for submissions and they provide guidance to reviewers on everything that is expected of them. Editors encourage the reviewers to comment on the originality of submissions, to be alert to redundant publication and plagiarism and to disclose any potential competing interests before agreeing to review the article in question. Peer Review Form could be downloaded here.
Editors of Convivium are responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted should be published. Editors may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
Editors evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit and relevance to the scope of the journal, without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
Editors or 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. Editors ensure the protection of both the authors’ and the reviewers’ identity and maintain the confidentiality of the material submitted to the journal while under review.
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted paper will not be used by the editors or the members of the advisory board for their own research purposes without the author’s explicit written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. The editors are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint, or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. The editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication.
Editors are aware of their duty to act if they suspect misconduct or if an allegation of misconduct is brought to them, both in the case of published and unpublished papers. Editors should make all reasonable efforts to ensure that a proper investigation into alleged misconduct is conducted, while following the COPE flowcharts where applicable. Editors should make all reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem.
Errors, inaccurate or misleading statements will be corrected promptly and with due prominence. Editors should follow the COPE guidelines on retractions.
Editors are aware of their duty to act if they suspect misconduct or if an allegation of misconduct is brought to them, both in the case of published and unpublished papers. Editors should make all reasonable efforts to ensure that a proper investigation into alleged misconduct is conducted, while following the COPE flowcharts where applicable. Editors should make all reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem.
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the manuscript. Any invited 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 her/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. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author(s) is inappropriate. Referees should express their opinions clearly with supporting arguments.
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 or institutions connected to the pape
Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers should identify cases in which relevant published work referred to in the paper has not been cited in the reference section. They should point out whether observations or arguments derived from other publications are accompanied by the respective source. Reviewers should notify the editor of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Authors should ensure that they submit only entirely original work. If any work and/or words of others have been used, this has to be appropriately acknowledged. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work should also be cited. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Authors should not submit the same manuscript or articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal concurrently. Manuscripts which have been published as copyrighted material elsewhere cannot be submitted. In addition, manuscripts under review by the journal should not be re-submitted to copyrighted publications.
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
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 coauthors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be named in an Acknowledgement section. The corresponding author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication. All co-authors must be clearly indicated at the time of manuscript submission. Requests to add co-authors after a manuscript has been accepted will require approval of the editor.
All pertinent sources of financial support for a project enabling the creation of the manuscript should be disclosed.
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in her/his own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editors or publisher and to cooperate with the editors to retract or correct the paper in form of an erratum.
Convivium is committed to define clearly the respective roles of publisher and of editors in order to ensure the autonomy of editorial decisions, without influence from advertisers or other commercial partners.
The publisher should protect the intellectual property and copyright of Convivium, its imprints, authors and publishing partners by promoting and maintaining each article’s published version of record. Convivium ensures the integrity and transparency of each published article with respect to: conflicts of interest, publication and research funding, publication and research ethics, cases of publication and research misconduct, confidentiality, authorship, article corrections, clarifications and retractions, and timely publication of content.
In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of a correction statement or erratum or, in the most severe cases, the retraction of the affected work.
Copyright 2020 Centrum raně středověkých studií. Všechna práva vyhrazena