Publishing ethics

Editorial office of the magazine "Barometr Regionalny. Analizy i Prognozy" observes all the rules of publishing ethics that prevent dishonest publishing practices in compliance with the following guidelines:
1. Committee on Publication Ethics COPE: https://publicationethics.org
2. Publishing Ethics Resource Kit (PERK – Elsevier): https://www.elsevier.com/publishingethics
3. Code of Ethics for Research Workers, devised by the Science Ethics Committee of the Polish Academy of Sciences (in Polish): https://pan.pl/app/uploads/2025/02/KodeksEtykiPracownika.pdf

The rules applicable to the authors

1. Academic credibility 
The authors are obliged to fully and honestly present the outcome of their research and the sources, thus making them possible to be reconstructed by third parties. The authors are also required to interpret the outcome of their research in an objective way.

2. Originality
The authors are obliged to submit original works only (no plagiarism, autoplagiarism, or forgery of research methods or data are allowed). In the case of using other authors’ works, they are also required to document the sources by means of quotations or to obtain a written permission from the author or the authorised party to use the previously published materials.

3. Authorship
Authorship should be limited to persons who have made a substantial contribution to  specifying, planning, conducting and interpreting the research. In order to prevent ghostwriting and guest authorship, the persons who have contributed to the work should be listed as its co-authors. All the authors are obliged to approve the final version of their work and give their consent for its publication. The authors are also required to specify in written form the contribution of other persons to the work.

Ghostwriting – a person that has contributed to the work is not listed in the acknowledgments.
Guest authorship – a person’s contribution is small or nonexistent but they have been listed as the authors/co-authors.

4. The disclosure of data
The authors are obliged to provide raw data or to allow access to this data. The authors are also  required to retain this data for one year from the moment of publication.

5. Conflicts of interest
Conflicts of interest arise with reference to all professional, social or economic relations that affect the objective assessment of the text. The authors are obliged to provide a written statement of the absence of any conflicts of interest.

6. The reliability of the sources
The authors are obliged to reliably disclose the sources that have been used in their work and include them in the appended bibliography.

7. Errors in published works
The authors are obliged to immediately notify the editorial board of any errors that they have detected in their published works. After consultation with the editor-in-chief and the publisher, an addendum, correction, or errata will be published.

8. Redundant, multiplied, and parallel publications
The authors are obliged to submit works that have not been previously published (also in electronic form) in another journal or book. Likewise, it is unacceptable to submit an academic article that is a translation of a text already published or submitted to another publisher.

9. Financing
The authors are obliged to disclose all sources of financing in their work.

10. Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence Tools (AI Tools)
Authors may use AI tools as an aid in their scholarly work; however, this does not relieve them of responsibility for the content, accuracy, originality, and integrity of the publication.

AI tools may not be listed as authors or co-authors of a publication. Responsibility for the content of the publication rests with its authors.

An author should disclose the use of an AI tool if it had a significant impact on the preparation of the content, its structure, analysis, or development of the material. The disclosure should include the name of the tool used, as well as the purpose and scope of its use.

If AI tools were used in the research process, in particular for data analysis or processing, modelling, interpretation of results, or preparation of visualizations, the manner in which they were used should be appropriately described in the publication.

Authors are required to independently verify content generated by AI tools, as well as all sources, citations, and data identified or provided by such tools. The use of AI tools must not result in plagiarism, fabrication or falsification of data, results, or sources, nor in presenting content generated by such tools as the author's independent scholarly contribution.

The rules applicable to the editorial board

1. Responsibility
The editorial board decides whether to accept articles for publication on the basis of their   compliance with the guidelines provided to the author, their academic merits, and the reviews they have received. The editors are responsible for the content published in the journal.

2. Impartiality
Articles are assessed on the basis of their originality, quality and value to the journal regardless of their authors’ nationality, background, gender, ethnic identity, religion or political views.

3. Confidentiality
The editors are obliged to ensure the confidentiality of the authors and reviewers. Unpublished articles or their fragments may not be used in the research conducted by the members of the editorial board or the reviewers without the written consent of the authors.

4. Prevention of conflicts of interest
The reviewers appointed by the editorial board do not have any direct reporting relationships or direct personal relationships with the authors of the texts.

5. The publishing process
At each stage of the publishing process, the editorial board maintains correspondence with the author, editor and reviewer, during which any of the above persons may submit corrections.

6. Academic credibility
The editorial board is committed to ensuring the credibility of the published works. Whenever  fraudulent practices are suspected, the board is obliged to withdraw the text from the publishing process and initiate an investigation and correction procedure. Any abuse (plagiarism, self-plagiarism, falsification of data, etc.) will be reported in writing to the editor-in-chief. Such a report may come from a reader, a member of the editorial board, a reviewer, or any other person who has doubts about the credibility of the text. If ethical principles have been violated in a text that has already been published, the editorial board is obliged to withdraw the publication from its website, include a statement justifying the withdrawal of the article (in the case of a printed journal, the statement will be included in its next issue), and inform the author, the institution to which the author is affiliated, and the reviewers, as well as any affected persons and, if necessary, other ethical supervisory bodies.

7. Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence Tools (AI Tools)
The Editorial Team may use AI tools as an aid in the publishing process; however, such tools may not replace the independent judgment, expertise, or responsibility of members of the Editorial Team.

Responsibility for decisions concerning the acceptance, rejection, submission for peer review, or publication of a manuscript rests with the Editorial Team. AI tools may not independently make editorial decisions or serve as the sole basis for such decisions.

The Editorial Team is required to maintain the confidentiality of materials received in connection with the publishing process. Unpublished manuscripts, excerpts thereof, data, reviews, or confidential editorial correspondence should not be entered into publicly available AI tools.

The use of AI tools by the Editorial Team must not result in violations of authors' rights, intellectual property rights, personal data protection, or the confidentiality of the publishing process.

Information, suggestions, or results obtained through the use of AI tools should be verified by a member of the Editorial Team before being used in the publishing process.

The rules applicable to the reviewers

1. Deadlines
The reviewers are obliged to submit their reviews on time. If there is a concern that the deadline will not be met, the reviewers are required to inform the editorial board immediately. The reviewers are also obliged to notify the board immediately if they have abandoned their commitment to produce a review.

2. Co-operation with the editorial board
The reviewers are obliged to co-operate with the editorial board/publisher and the authors in order to prepare the best versions of their texts.

3. Objectivity
The reviewers are obliged to produce objective reviews, maintaining ethical standards and  focusing only on formal and substantive issues. Any criticism of the author is inappropriate and thus prohibited.

4. Confidentiality
In accordance with the principle of confidentiality, the reviewers are obliged not to pass on or disclose any information concerning the reviewed texts to third parties. Access to the reviewed works is exclusively limited to the authors, the editorial board, and the reviewers. The board does not share the authors’ data with the reviewers.

5. Conflicts of interest
The reviewers should not have any relationships of direct professional subordination or direct personal relationships with the authors of the texts.   

6 . The verification of the originality of the texts
The reviewers are obliged to immediately report any violation of ethical standards by the authors, i.e. plagiarism or partial repetition of any other publications in the reviewed articles.

7. Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence Tools (AI Tools)
A reviewer may use AI tools only as an aid and in a manner that does not compromise the confidentiality of the peer-review process, authors' rights, or the principles of research integrity.

The use of AI tools must not result in the disclosure, use, or dissemination of unpublished information contained in the manuscript under review.

Reviewers should not enter the content of a manuscript under review, excerpts thereof, data, tables, results, or other materials obtained in connection with the peer-review process into publicly available AI tools.

The use of AI tools does not relieve reviewers of their obligation to independently and critically evaluate the manuscript. AI tools may not replace the reviewer's scholarly judgment or independently serve as the basis for a recommendation concerning the acceptance, rejection, or revision of an article.

The reviewer bears full responsibility for the content and substantive assessment presented in the review. Information, suggestions, or assessments obtained through the use of AI tools should be verified by the reviewer before being incorporated into the review.