Ethical Statement

In its publication ethics the History of Philosophy Yearbook (HPY) follows the Guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Compliance with these standards is mandatory for all parties involved in the publication process.

1. Editorial Team Responsibilities

1.1 Fair Play
All submitted manuscripts are evaluated by the quality of their content with no regard to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnicity, citizenship, political views and other personal characteristics of their authors.

1.2 Confidentiality
All received manuscripts are treated as documents that contain confidential information. Access to this information is given only to those who are involved in its assessment and preparation for publication. The Editoral Team guarantees that the process of reviewing is anonymous.

1.3. Conflict of Interests
Unpublished materials in the submitted manuscript may not be used by the members of the Editorial Team who have access to the content of the manuscripts for their own personal purposes (such as their own research) without explicit written consent of the author(s).

1.4 Peer Reviewers
The members of the Editorial Team select two qualified peer reviewers for each recieved and registered (i.e. those meeting formal requirements for design, subject matter, volume, etc.) manuscript. Peer reviewers may be chosen from among the members of the Editorial Board, the Advisory Board or they may be external, guest reviewers.

1.5 Publication Decisions
The final decision on accepting manuscripts recommended by peer reviewers for publication is made by the Editorial Team and the Editor-in-Chief. It is based on an objective assessment of the manuscript (its academic value, relevance and quality of exposition) and the principles of the HPY editorial policy.

2. Peer Reviewers’ Responsibilities

2.1 Contribution to Editorial Decisions
The manuscript review procedure is designed to assist the Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Team in deciding accepting the manuscript for publication and to help improve the texts submitted by authors.

2.2 Promptness
In most cases, authors will be notified of the acceptance of their articles for review within three weeks of submitting a manuscript to the HPY. The article review procedure takes up to four months from the moment the manuscript is submitted.

2.3 Confidentiality

The review process is anonymous, both for authors and peer reviewers.

2.4 Objectivity Standards

Peer reviewers must be as objective as possible. Personal criticism of the author is not allowed. Peer reviewers have to express their position clearly and support it with reasonable arguments.

If the invited peer reviewer feels that he/she does not have sufficient expertise to review the research reported in the manuscript or cannot prepare the review in time, he/she should notify the Editorial Team as soon as possible.

2.5 Conflict of Interest

Peer reviewers must reject proposals for reviewing manuscripts that trun out to create a conflict of interest with their own research work (for reasons of competition, collaboration, or any other relationship between them and the authors or institutions associated with the relevant manuscript).

2.6 Acknowledgement of Sources
Any previously published statement, observation or argument mentioned in the manuscript must be accompanied by an appropriate reference to the source. The peer reviewer must inform the Editorial Team about any significant similarities or overlaps in the content of the reviewed manuscript and any relevant previously published information that he/she is aware of.

3. Authors’ Responsibilities

3.1 Reporting Standards

Authors are responsible for the reasonableness and integrity of their research and should strive to present all available research results, including those that are not compatible with their hypothesis.
Knowingly false or inaccurate statements are not allowed.

It is the responsibility of the author to ensure the accuracy of the citation, the correctness of the bibliographic descriptions, and the transcription of names and titles.

3.2 Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must follow standards of academic integrity and avoid plagiarism, improper borrowing, falsification of data, manipulation, etc. Authors should correctly refer to all sources they use in their work, and refrain from indirectly quoting sources with which they are not familiar.

Forms of plagiarism include, inter alia:
— the use (verbatim quotation) of any amount of any material without identifying the source;
— the use of tables, graphs, charts and any other form of graphical representation of information without identifying the source;
— the use of tables, graphs, charts and any other forms of graphical representation of information published in scientific and popular publications without consent of the copyright holder;
— the use without written permission of materials whose authors or copyright holders prohibit their use without special approval.

Forms of improper borrowing include, inter alia:
— the lack of graphic highlighting of verbatim quoted text when the source is quoted;
— incorrect references (incomplete bibliographic descriptions of sources, preventing their identification);
— the reference not to the original source of the text quoted without an explicit note of this fact (an error in the identification of the original source);
— excessive citation (including that of one's own work), the amount of which is not justified by the type and purpose of the article.

Academic translations of texts that may be subject to copyright law are printed only if translators had obtained rights to publish it and with the permission of the copyright holders. Authors of submitted translations must themsevles reach an agreement with the copyright holders on the transfer of translation rights.

3.3 Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publications

By submitting a manuscript to HPY, the authors state that the manuscript is written by them personally, contains original research findings that have not been previously published and is not simultaneously considered for publication elsewhere.

Authors should not submit manuscripts describing essentially the same results to more than one journal as a primary publication. Simultaneous submission of the same manuscript to several journals is considered unethical and will be ground for rejecting the submitted manuscript.

3.4 Information on Financing
Authors are responsible for identifying the sources of financial support for the project, the results of which are presented in the article, as well as for identifying the persons who have contributed to the research (including co-authors).

3.5 Authorship of the Manuscript
The list of authors of the manuscript should include the names of only those researchers who have made a significant contribution to the preparation and conduct of the research referred to in the manuscript. The list of authors should not mention the names of people who were not related to the work presented in the manuscript. All authors mentioned must agree to their name being included in the list of authors.

3.6 Significant Errors in Published Works

Should significant errors or inaccuracies in a published work be discovered, the author must notify the Editorial Team and facilitate the withdrawal of the published material or the publication of a notice of error.