About the Journal
Aims and scope:
- The journal is focused on the issues covering the notion of the research field in cultural anthropology and its affiliated disciplines. Hence, all texts widely covering the following fields are welcome: the significance of theoretical studies and experience, reflections on contemporary ethnographic practice, particular focus on human carnality, and the processuality of ethnography.
The aim is to provide readers an access to the academic sources combining theoretical work of cultural anthropology and affiliated disciplines with reflections and contemporary research practice.
- The terms anthropology and research field are treated widely as a particular form of living or being in the world. Their basic definition for today states as follows:
- Anthropology - a desire to get to know the others (including non-humans in posthuman and non-anthropocentric research);
- Research field - interaction with all the others and non-humans.
Therefore, all the experience and ideas moving within this framework, as well as shifting and exploring their limits (e.g. autoethnography) are welcome.
- The wide range of different ideas for anthropological ways of understanding are interesting. Ethnography is a discipline that eagerly opens to new areas (e.g. Internet), constantly redefines itself and discovers new dimensions of current problems, research fields, methods, and theories. The reflections on contemporary ethnography, its limitations and qualities are of equal importance.
- The journal is addressed to all that practice various forms of cultural anthropology / ethnology, and affiliated disciplines (e.g.sociology, pedagogy, cultural studies, oral history, etc.): academics, researchers, doctoral students, students, members of NGOs, cultural institutions employees as well as representatives of any other fields and workplaces.
Publishing Ethics and Malpractice Statement
Ethical principles for the journal Etnografia. Praktyki, Teorie, Doświadczenia.
(Based on COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors)
The following are the standards of expected ethical behaviour for all parties involved in the publishing process in Etnografia. Praktyki, Teorie, Doświadczenia.: the author, Editorial Team, Editorial Board, the peer reviewers and the Publisher. These standards shall apply at every stage of the procedure, as well as they should be respected by the readers after finishing the publishing process.
All articles sent to the journal are peer reviewed for authenticity, compliance with ethical standards, and academic usefulness.
I. Duties of Editors
- Standards regulating the work of the Editorial Team
The Editorial Team monitors the ethical standards of academic and scientific publications and takes all possible measures against any publication malpractices.
Submitted articles are peer reviewed in terms of intellectual content. Personal issues of the author (race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, citizenship or political preferences) do not affect the final evaluation.
The publication of the text, article or any other form of content is due to the Editorial Team agreement. The decision is based on the following factors: importance of the submitted material, its originality, clarity and the relevance to the scope of the journal.
Submitted articles shall remain confidential while under peer review. The Editorial Team must not disclose any information on the submitted texts to anyone except for the authors, peer reviewers, Editorial Team and the Publisher. In some cases (e.g. suspicion of plagiarism or any other scientific misconduct) the Editorial Team reserves the right to depart from this principle in compliance with the procedure provided by the COPE Code.
Nor Editorial Team nor any other Party involved in the publishing process can not use any material that has not been accepted for printing without the written agreement of its author.
The Editorial Team is obliged to guard the integrity of published articles by issuing corrections and retractions of the material when needed and pursuing suspected or alleged research and publications misconduct. Plagiarism and the usage of fraudulent data are not acceptable.
The Editorial Team is always willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed.
- Retractions of the articles
The Editorial Team may consider retracting a publication when:
- there are clear indications that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g. data fabrication) or honest mistake (e.g. miscalculation or methodological error);
- the submission or the findings has been previously published;
- the submission may be plagiarized or it is not compliant with the ethical standards.
Retraction notice shall contain specific information on the retractioned article (including at least the title and authors of the text in the retraction heading) and the reason(s) of retraction (in order to distinguish between honest mistakes from misconduct).
Retracted articles will not be removed from the printed copies of the journal, but their retracted status will be indicated as clearly as possible.
- Counteracting Ghostwriting and Guest Authorship
In order to provide academic reliability, the Editorial Team selects submissions in compliance with the standards preventing ghostwriting and guest authorship.
Ghostwriting is the non-disclosure of other people’s contribution to the publication (one significantly contributes in the article, however his/her input is neither revealed as an author nor notified in acknowledgments).
The guest authorship (honorary authorship) means giving as co-author a person whose contribution to the publications is negligible or did not take place at all.
To counteract any cases of ghostwriting and guest authorship, the Editorial Team institutes procedures as follows:
- Authors of text with more than one author are required to provide full information on the co-authorship of the submitted article, including affiliations and contribution on every individual author in the creation of the article (e.g. who is the founder of the concepts, assumptions, methods or protocoling procedures applied in the text) by presenting a written declaration of disclosure. The corresponding author is held responsible for the truth of the above declarations.
- All revealed cases of scientific misconduct of ghostwriting and guest authorship will be notified to the academic community, including authors’ workplaces, contributing agents, scientific societies, etc.
- Authors are obliged to disclose all financial sources of their research (financial disclosure).
The Editorial Team documents all the cases of scientific misconduct, especially those violating academic ethical standards and notifies relevant authorities (including authors workplace and other editorial teams) about them.
II. Duties of authors
The author is defined as a person:
- who significantly contributed to the idea of article, its intellectual content, analysis or data interpretation;
- who prepared draft or critically evaluated the text, making a significant intellectual contribution;
- who decided on the final version of the material.
Authors of submitted articles are obliged to present an accurate account of the research performed as well as an objective interpretation of their results. Underlying data shall be represented accurately in the article. The submission shall contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. The research fabrication or presenting any fraudulent / inaccurate findings and statements constitute unethical behaviour and may cause rejection or retraction of the submission or published article.
Submitted articles shall be originally written entirely by the authors themselves. In case the author used the research and/or words of others it needs to be visibly cited or quoted. Plagiarism and data fraudulent is forbidden.
Since the authors may be asked to provide the raw data for editorial peer review, they shall be prepared to disclose the source of their data and/or information and retain them for a reasonable time after publication of the article.
The republication of previously published article or part of it (self-plagiarism) or any attempts to resubmit the article affiliating the same research in a similar way to other journals / publishing houses, violate academic ethical standards. All revealed cases of submitting one article to different journals will be notified to the academic community, including authors’ contributing agents, other editorial offices, etc.
The Editorial Board closely supervises all attempts of retracting the article at every stage of the publishing process, especially texts that are under peer review, or ready to publish. It is considered highly unethical to retract the article and submit it to another journal in order to optimize or maximize impact factor or point bonus provided by ministerial regulations. All revealed attempts of the above practices will be notified to the academic community, including authors’ contributing agents, other editorial offices, etc.
Authorship shall be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made contributions should be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author is held responsible for ensuring that all appropriate co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the article and have agreed to its submission for publication.
The proper acknowledgment of the work of others shall always be given. The authors shall cite publications that have been influential in determining the scope of their research.
In case the authors discover a fundamental mistake or another significant inaccuracy in their own published article, they are held responsible to report it to the Editorial Team / Publishing house and actively contribute in retraction or correction of the material.
III. Duties of Peer Reviewers
- Standards regulating the work of the Peer Reviewers
Peer Reviewers shall act as an advisory role. Their duty is to participate in the work of the Editorial Team and assist in deciding on editorial tasks. Peer Reviewers may also help corresponding authors to improve submitted articles.
The chosen peer reviewers are the most acknowledged specialists in the field of study affiliated in submitted articles, who shall provide comprehensive and content-related evaluation of the material.
Peer reviewers are obliged to provide the evaluation within a predetermined deadline. In case of being unable to meet the deadline or undertake a review for justified reasons, they shall immediately notify the Editorial Board.
All articles submitted for peer review must be treated as confidential documents. Hence, they must not be shown or discussed with others except those authorized by the Editorial Team.
The identities of individual parties shall not be disclosed neither to peer reviewers nor other authors. In justified cases of suspicion of scientific misconduct the Editorial Team reserves the right to depart from this principle in compliance with the procedure provided by the COPE Code.
The review of submitted article shall be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is considered as highly inappropriate. Peer reviewers should express their evaluation clearly with appropriate supporting arguments.
Peer reviewers shall identify the relevant published work that has not been cited or quoted by the author of submission. Any substantial similarity or overlap between the submitted text and any other published article must be reported to the Editorial Team.
- The Conflict of Interest
The Conflict of Interest arises when an individual or an institution (e.g. the author, entity represented by the author, academic community, peer reviewer or the editor) is involved in an economic, institutional, or personal relationship that inappropriately influence or may influence parties’ actions. Above occurrence may also arise when the person affected is unaware of it.
Other related terms for this phenomena are: a conflict of obligations and a conflict of loyalty.
The potential influence of the Conflict of Interest on academic or scientific evaluations ranges from negligible to very great.
The most common examples of a Conflict of Interest are related to economic relations (e.g. employment, receiving remuneration, providing paid consultations or expert opinions, grant applications, etc.). Such situations carry the greatest risk of undermining the credibility of a journal, authors or even the research itself. However, the sources of a Conflict of Interest may also include personal relationships, the academic rivalry, or even the political and intellectual passion.
Evaluations must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage of the peer reviewer. Every party who may be involved in a Conflict of Interest at any stage of the publication process (each author, reviewer or member of the Editorial Team), is obliged to report it to the Editor-in-chief.
IV. Duties of the Publisher
In case of alleged or proved scientific misconduct, unethical publication or plagiarism, the Publisher and Editorial Team will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and amend corrections, clarifications, and apologies, including immediate errata publication or retraction of the article, when needed.
In such situations all procedures will be taken in compliance with the policy provided by the COPE Code.
- The readers
In case of alleged or proved scientific misconduct, the readers shall report their objections to the Editorial Board, who will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation. All procedures will be taken in compliance with the policy provided by COPE Code.
The Editorial Team shall notify the reader about the results of the inspection and disclose them to the public when needed.