Publication Ethics Policy
The journal’s Editorial Team makes every effort to uphold the highest ethical standards at every stage of the publication process. The Editorial Team adheres to the principles of publication ethics and follows the procedures recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
Standards for authors
1. Research integrity and data availability
Authors must conduct the research reported in their publications in accordance with the principles of research integrity. The research process should be described in sufficient detail to allow it to be replicated, and the results of analyses must be interpreted objectively. Fabrication or falsification of data or research methods is unacceptable. Sources of data and information must be identified in the text, and the findings and research results of others must be cited using a transparent and reliable referencing system. Information obtained privately may not be published without the permission of the person who provided it. In exceptional circumstances, authors may be asked to provide the Editorial Team or reviewers with the research data underlying the claims made in the article. They must therefore store such data securely, including after the text has been published.
2. Originality
Folia Historica Cracoviensia accepts only original, previously unpublished manuscripts that constitute the intellectual property of their authors. Authors must submit only material that does not infringe the copyright of third parties. All borrowed material, references, and sources of inspiration used in the article must be acknowledged and properly cited. Plagiarism in any form, including self-plagiarism, is unacceptable.
3. Authorship disclosure
To prevent ghostwriting and guest authorship, the Editorial Team requires disclosure of each author’s contribution to the publication at every stage of its preparation, particularly responsibility for the concept, assumptions, methods, and individual sections of the text. The list of authors must be limited to those who made a substantial contribution to the text. A statement describing each author’s contribution must accompany the submission. Other individuals who participated in the research process at its various stages should be acknowledged, for example in the acknowledgements section. The authors are responsible for the final form of the text; each author must review its final version and consent to publication.
4. Prevention of conflicts of interest and disclosure of funding sources
Authors must inform the Editorial Team of any potential conflicts of interest, particularly legal, professional, or financial conflicts, that could affect the conduct, objectivity, or results of the research. If the preparation of the text received financial support, its sources must be disclosed. Authors of articles published in the Commentationes et dissertationes section are asked to provide the Editorial Team with information about the involvement of funding bodies in the preparation of the publication.
5. Image integrity
Images accompanying a text must not be altered in a manner that compromises their integrity. Removing, adding, obscuring, enhancing, or moving elements within an image is unacceptable. Minor adjustments — such as changes to brightness, contrast, or colour balance — are permitted provided that they do not affect the content or meaning of the original image. Images depicting individuals who do not perform public functions, which were not taken at a public event, for example as group photographs, and in which the person’s likeness is not merely an incidental detail of a broader scene, may be published only with that person’s consent to the dissemination of their likeness and the processing of their personal data.
6. Compliance with procedures for research involving human participants
If the research reported in the article involved human participants or the processing of personal data, the authors must attach to the manuscript a favourable decision from the ethics committee operating at the institution with which they are affiliated, approving the conduct of the research. Authors must also confirm that the research data were obtained in accordance with applicable Polish and European Union law and that the participants provided informed consent to take part in the study.
7. Reporting errors
Authors must notify the Editorial Team immediately if they discover errors or inaccuracies in an article, including after its publication. Such reports should be addressed to the Editor-in-Chief so that further action, particularly correction or retraction of the text, can be determined. If an error or inaccuracy is reported by a third party, the authors must cooperate with the Editorial Team to resolve the matter promptly.
8. No concurrent, redundant or duplicate publication
Folia Historica Cracoviensia accepts only manuscripts that have not been published previously or submitted concurrently to another scholarly journal. Republishing research findings that have already been presented in another article is unacceptable.
Standards for the editorial team
1. Responsibility for editorial decisions
The Editorial Team is responsible for decisions concerning articles published in the Commentationes et dissertationes section, including their acceptance or rejection. In making its decisions, the Editorial Team must consider the integrity and significance of the articles to researchers and readers, as well as applicable legal requirements, including those concerning libel or defamation. The Editorial Team consults reviewers when making decisions about the publication of a text. If errors or inaccuracies are identified, the Editorial Team is prepared to correct or retract an article submitted for publication.
2. Impartiality and objectivity (Fair Play)
The Editorial Team must evaluate all submissions impartially and solely on the basis of their quality, content, and significance, irrespective of the authors’ affiliations, place of origin, nationality, ethnic origin, gender, religious or political beliefs, or race.
3. Confidentiality
Submissions received by Folia Historica Cracoviensia are treated as confidential and are not made public or disclosed to third parties outside the peer-review and publication processes. The Editorial Team safeguards confidentiality at every stage of both processes, including by protecting the anonymity of reviewers. Members of the Editorial Team undertake not to use submitted materials in their own research before publication without the authors’ written consent.
4. Safeguarding the peer-review process
The Editorial Team must ensure that the peer-review process is rigorous, impartial, and efficient. Unjustified delays in the process are unacceptable. The Editorial Team should appoint reviewers with appropriate expertise in the subject matter under evaluation. Articles published in the Commentationes et dissertationes section must be evaluated by at least two reviewers under a procedure that preserves the anonymity of both parties (double-blind peer review). Review reports must be treated as confidential. The Editorial Team must prevent potential conflicts of interest and investigate all cases in which there is a risk of bias on the part of a reviewer. It also makes every effort to ensure that no relationships exist between authors and reviewers that could compromise the objectivity or integrity of the review. Members of the Editorial Team — namely the Editor-in-Chief, Deputy Editor-in-Chief, and Editorial Secretary — and members of the Editorial Board may not serve as reviewers.
5. Fair publishing practices
The Editorial Team ensures a transparent and fair publication process by establishing clear rules for authors and reviewers. It applies the same rules to all submissions and processes them entirely through the same Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform. The Editorial Team establishes clear mechanisms for appealing editorial decisions and reporting errors or inaccuracies. The Editorial Team undertakes not to use unfair practices to influence the journal’s position in citation systems or rankings, particularly by requiring authors to cite articles published in the journal.
6. Maintaining the standards of articles published in the Commentationes et dissertationes section
The Editorial Team accepts reports of errors and inaccuracies identified in articles published in the Commentationes et dissertationes section. Reports should be sent directly to the Editor-in-Chief at the email address provided on the journal’s website. If a report is not submitted by the authors of the text, the Editorial Team contacts them immediately to determine the appropriate course of action. Reports are investigated without undue delay. Once a report has been substantiated, articles published in that section are corrected by updating the electronic version or publishing an erratum in the first printed issue released after the error was identified. Texts that cannot be corrected in this manner are retracted.
7. Disclosure of conflicts of interest
The Editorial Team must disclose any potential conflicts of interest arising in connection with the submissions being processed.
Standards for reviewers
1. Maintaining scholarly standards
Through their work, reviewers influence both editorial decisions and the final form of the article being published. They must help ensure that the publication meets the highest possible scholarly standards.
2. Impartiality
Reviewers must evaluate all submissions impartially and solely on the basis of their quality, content, and significance, irrespective of the authors’ affiliations, place of origin, nationality, ethnic origin, gender, religious or political beliefs, or race.
3. Confidentiality
Reviewers must treat all materials under review as confidential. Making them public or disclosing them to third parties is unacceptable. Reviewers may not use materials entrusted to them in their own research before publication. Review reports must likewise be treated as confidential. If, despite the Editorial Team’s efforts, a reviewer is able to identify the author of a text, the reviewer must inform the Editorial Team immediately and withdraw from the peer-review process.
4. Research integrity
Reviewers should agree to evaluate only articles published in the Commentationes et dissertationes section that fall within their area of expertise. Reviews must be prepared clearly and comprehensibly, in accordance with the highest scholarly standards, and within the deadline set by the Editorial Team. Unjustified delays in submitting a review are unacceptable. Criticism of the text must be substantive and clearly identify what is expected of its authors. Offensive language and personal attacks directed at the author are unacceptable. Any concerns about the originality of the article under review or its similarity to other published works must be reported to the Editorial Team. Any errors or inaccuracies identified in a completed review that could affect the evaluation of the article or its scholarly merit must be reported to the Editorial Team immediately, including after the reviewed text has been published.
5. Conflicts of interest
Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest, particularly legal, institutional, or financial conflicts, arising in connection with articles published in the Commentationes et dissertationes section that they have been asked to review. This also applies to personal relationships with the authors of the text under review. A conflict of interest includes a reporting relationship, including professional subordination, direct research collaboration during the two years preceding the year in which the review is prepared, or a close personal relationship — kinship up to the second degree or marriage — between the reviewer and the author of the text under review.
6. Respect for intellectual property and copyright
Throughout the peer-review process, reviewers must respect the copyright and intellectual property rights of the authors and third parties. All references, allusions, and sources of inspiration underlying the claims made in a review must be acknowledged and properly cited.
Guidelines on the use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (Generative AI)
The Editorial Team does not recommend the use of generative artificial intelligence at any stage of manuscript preparation or the peer-review and publication processes. In establishing guidelines for tools based on generative artificial intelligence, it emphasises the importance of research integrity, confidentiality, and the protection of copyright.
Authors
The Editorial Team does not recommend using generative artificial intelligence to produce articles published in the Commentationes et dissertationes section. Submitting a text generated entirely by artificial intelligence tools is unacceptable. If justified, the use of generative artificial intelligence tools, including for improving the quality of a text or analysing datasets, must be responsible, limited, purposeful, and conducted entirely under the authors’ supervision. Authors must verify that the output of these tools does not contain errors, fabricated data, or biased content. The authors remain responsible for the entire submitted text. Generative artificial intelligence tools may not be used to alter images accompanying an article in a manner that compromises their integrity. This applies particularly to removing, adding, obscuring, enhancing, or moving elements within an image. Minor adjustments — such as changes to brightness, contrast, or colour balance — are permitted provided that they do not affect the content of the original image. The use of generative artificial intelligence tools must not infringe the intellectual property or copyright of third parties. Every use of generative artificial intelligence tools must be disclosed when the text is submitted. Authors must identify the specific tools used, the purpose and scope of their use, and provide an acceptable justification. Together with the disclosure concerning the use of these tools, authors must submit a statement accepting responsibility for the submitted text.
Reviewers
The use of generative artificial intelligence tools to prepare reviews is unacceptable. In particular, reviewers must not upload the text under review to publicly available generative artificial intelligence tools, for example to check its originality or generate a summary, as this could breach the confidentiality and non-public status of the manuscript. Generating a review using artificial intelligence tools is unacceptable because it violates the principles of research integrity and objectivity and may infringe the intellectual property and copyright of the article’s creators. Generative artificial intelligence tools must not be used even to improve the language of a review. The reviewer alone bears full responsibility for the review.
Editorial team
The Editorial Team should not use generative artificial intelligence tools at any stage of the peer-review or publication process. In particular, a submitted text must not be uploaded to publicly available generative artificial intelligence tools, for example to check its originality or generate a summary, as this could breach the confidentiality and non-public status of the manuscript. This rule also applies to review reports, which are treated as confidential.
