Ethical Codex
The Church History Review fully accepts the ALLEA Code of Ethics
1. A STATEMENT OF MORAL AND ETHICAL PRINCIPLES FOR PUBLICATION
The Review of Church History (ISSN 1585-7476; ISSN (online): 1587-026X) is a double-blind review journal, so all parties involved in its publication (the author, the editor, the proofreader and the publisher) must agree to the standards of ethical behaviour expected. This ethical statement is issued by COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics, https://publicationethics.org/core-practices).
2. DECISIONS ON PUBLICATION
The editor of the journal decides which of the articles submitted for publication will be published in the journal. The editor may be guided by guidelines set by the journal's editorial board and may be restricted by the laws on defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism currently in force. The editor may seek help from other editors or proofreaders in making his or her decisions. The editor of the journal may run a program to detect plagiarism.
3. EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES
The editor will at all times evaluate the intellectual content of manuscripts without regard to the race, sex, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, nationality or political opinions of the authors.
4. CONFIDENTIALITY
The editor and editorial staff will not disclose any information about the manuscript submitted for publication. Exceptions to this rule include the corresponding author, proofreaders, potential proofreaders, other editorial advisors and the publisher.
5. DISCLOSURE AND CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The editor may not use unpublished material from the submitted manuscript for his/her own research without the written consent of the author.
6. THE DUTIES OF PROOFREADERS
Contributing to editorial decisions
The reviewer assists the editor in making decisions, if necessary, and supports the author in raising the scientific quality of the article during the peer review process.
Efficiency
If the selected referee considers that he/she is not professionally qualified to evaluate the research presented in the manuscript, or knows that he/she will not be able to provide an effective review within the deadline, he/she must inform the editor and withdraw from the refereeing process.
Confidentiality
All manuscripts received for evaluation shall be considered confidential. They may be disclosed or discussed with others only with the permission of the editor.
Objectivity
The evaluation must be carried out objectively. Criticism of the author is inappropriate. Editors must be clear in their opinions and provide arguments to support them.
Reference to sources
Proofreaders should recognise relevant published works not cited by the authors. Any statement that includes an observation, line of thought or argument from a previously published work should be accompanied by the appropriate citation. At the same time, the reviewer should draw the editor's attention to any substantial similarities or overlap between the manuscript under review and other previously published material of which he or she is aware.
Disclosure and conflict of interest
Any privileged information or ideas obtained during the evaluation process will be kept confidential and may not be used for personal promotion. Reviewers may not evaluate a manuscript if they have any conflict of interest arising from a competitive, collaborative or other relationship with authors, companies or institutions associated with the study.
7. THE OBLIGATIONS OF AUTHORS
Guidelines for disclosure
Authors presenting original research should provide an accurate account of the work carried out. Interpretations and conclusions should be based solely on facts or unbiased and logical evidence. The background data of the study must be presented accurately. The study should provide sufficient detail and references to enable others to replicate the processes described. False or knowingly inaccurate statements are considered unethical and unacceptable behaviour.
Authenticity and plagiarism
Authors must warrant that the paper is their own original work of authorship and that, where they have used the work and/or expressions of others, they have cited and properly referenced them.
Multiple, redundant or simultaneous publication
It is not good practice to include a manuscript presenting the same research in different individual publications or journals. Submitting the same manuscript to several journals simultaneously is considered unethical and unacceptable.
Reference to sources
The works cited must always be cited professionally. Authors should cite all publications that have influenced their work.
The post of study author
All persons who have made a substantial contribution to the conception, design, execution or interpretation of the study presented should be listed as authors. All persons who have made a significant contribution to the study should be identified as co-authors. At the same time, all those who participated in certain essential stages of the research project should be mentioned as contributors. The corresponding author should warrant that all significant co-authors have been named in the study, that no ineligible persons have been named as co-authors, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the study and agreed to its publication.
Disclosure and conflict of interest
All authors are required to disclose in their manuscript any financial or other material conflicts of interest that may affect its results or interpretation. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed. Major errors in published work If an author discovers a major error or inaccuracy in a previously published work, he or she should immediately notify the editor or publisher of the journal and cooperate with the editor in withdrawing or correcting the paper.
