Professional and ethical rules for publishing in the journal
Historie – Otázky – Problémy (HOP) journal, published by the Charles University, Faculty of Arts, Institute of Czech History provides a publication platform for historical and interdisciplinary humanities (in the broader sense) research focusing on the history of the Czech lands, Czechoslovakia and Central Europe. Publication of the journal is governed by a policy on publication ethics and professional misconduct.
These rules are binding on all parties involved in the publication of HOP. We see the objective review procedures, whose rules are described below, to be a guarantee of high-standard scholarship and the maintenance of journal standards.
1) Editorial obligations
- The Editorial Board, particularly the scholarly editors for particular journal issues, who are for the most part Institute of Czech History staff members, are responsible for the selection of studies, reviews and other texts to be published in the journal and ensure the formal standard of the journal.
- When selecting texts the scholarly editors and editorial board base themselves solely on the content, regardless of the race, sex, sexual orientation, denomination, citizenship or political views of the authors.
- The editors and editorial board are governed by legal regulations dealing with issues of libel, breach of copyright and plagiarism.
- The editors only provide information on received manuscripts to their authors, reviewers, potential reviewers and members of the editorial board.
- Unpublished texts must not be used by any of the editors or members of the editorial board for any purpose without the explicit approval of the author.
- The editors or editorial board select study reviewers and ensure the correct performance of disputation procedures, which take place in accordance with generally accepted rules under the supervision of the scholarly editor for the issue in question. Each text is always assessed by two independent specialists, who are in principal not employees at the same establishment as the author of the study. The texts are only published after positive assessments have been made by the reviewers and any comments have been incorporated. If both assessments are negative then the editorial board shall decide to reject the study and to inform the author of this.
- In the event of conflicting assessments the paper is given to a third person for assessment.
- The reviewer does not know the name of the author of the study under assessment and the author does not know the name of the reviewer (hence the review procedure is bilaterally anonymous, double-blind).
- The editorial board must avoid any conflict of interests.
- When presenting the journal the editorial board provides not only a printed version, but also collaboration with various electronic scholarly databases (e.g. Central and Eastern European Online Library, The Central European Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities).
- The Executive Editor ensures the formal quality and uniformity of studies published.
- The graphic design of the journal is the task of the Charles University, Faculty of Arts Publishers
2) Reviewers’ obligations
- The reviewers assist the scholarly editors and editorial board in decision-making over the classification of specific studies.
- Scholarly editors present suggestions made by individual reviewers to the authors of the studies in question and facilitate further communication with the authors
- Any reviewer who is referred to and who does not feel competent to review a particular study, or who cannot draw up a review assessment within the required period of time or who is prevented from doing so on other professional or personal grounds shall inform the editors of this within fourteen days of receiving a request for a review.
- All manuscripts submitted to the editors during their review procedures are considered to be confidential documents. It is not permitted to make all of their contents, any part thereof or any other information available to third parties without the express approval of the author.
- All assessments must be drawn up objectively, presenting clear arguments. Personal criticism against the author is inadmissible.
- Reviewers shall clearly present any reservations towards the manuscript, supported by appropriate arguments.
- Reviewers shall assess the originality and benefits of the papers, their methodological basis, clarity of formulation and work with the previous literature.
- Reviewers are to detail relevant publications known to them which have not been cited by the author. Any declaration that a particular part of the text under review or an argument involved has already been published should be supported by a relevant quotation and reference.
- Reviewers also have the duty to draw attention to any substantial similarity in the text under review with any other text of which they are aware.
- The contents of unpublished studies or any parts thereof may not be used again without the express approval of the author. Likewise no information acquired during the reviewing process may be used by the reviewer.
- The review procedure basically lasts two months.
- Reviewers should not assess studies where a risk of a conflict of interests arises due to relations with any of the authors, societies or institutions taking part in the creation of the study.
3) Authors’ obligations
- The authors are liable for the originality and linguistic standard of their work. Any usage of one’s own works or those of other authors must be accompanied by a precise quotation or an appropriate bibliographic reference.
- Authors must correctly cite all unpublished sources, both publications and electronic sources, in accordance with the journal’s citation conventions.
- Parallel submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal is understood to be an ethical lapse and as such inadmissible.
- Following submission of the manuscript, if the author then finds one or more serious errors in the argument, citations or bibliographical references in his text, he is to inform the editors of this without delay and collaborate over rectification.
- The authors must inform the editors if they become aware of any conflict of interests.