SCIENTIA PAEDAGOGICA EXPERIMENTALIS (SPE)

Publication Ethics guidelines

SCIENTIA PAEDAGOGICA EXPERIMENTALIS (SPE) and its Editors are fully committed to ethical publication practice.

The SPE Publication Ethics guidelines are based on the Emerald Publication Ethics guidelines which fully support the development of, and practical application of consistent ethical standards throughout the scholarly publishing community (permission 10/25/2016).

1 Ethical editorial behaviour

1.1 Authors responsibilities

The authors are obliged, when asked for, to participate in peer review processes; all authors have significantly contributed to the research; the author(s) are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes; and authors should provide a list of references.

Authors preparing the manuscript follow the Instructions for authors, and adhere to the following rules (i.a.):

• The article is original • The work has not been submitted elsewhere, and is not under consideration with any other publication • The work does not include libellous, defamatory or unlawful statements • Permission has been cleared for any third party material included • Proof of consent has been obtained for any named individuals or organisations • Authorship has been agreed prior to submission and that no one has been ‘gifted’ authorship or denied credit as an author (“ghost authorship”).

Authors submitting works to SPE publications do so on the understanding, if it is discovered that these basic principles have not been adhered to, action will be taken following the COPE Code of Conduct guidelines and may result in one of the following correction notices:

Erratum: This generally refers to a production error, which has been introduced during the publication process. If an erratum is issued, it will appear on the abstract of the online version of the paper to ensure full visibility. The erratum will also appear in the hard copy of the next volume or issue of the publication.

Corrigendum: This generally refers to an author error or oversight, prior to the paper’s submission to the publication. If a corrigendum is issued, it will appear on the abstract of the online version of the paper to ensure full visibility. The erratum will also appear in the hard copy of the next volume or issue of the publication.

Retraction notice: A retraction notice will be issued in serious cases of ethical misconduct or where the research is seriously flawed and misleading. In normal circumstances, the paper will remain in the online version of the journal or book. A retraction notice will appear on the online version of the paper. The retraction notice will also appear in the hard copy of the next volume or issue of the publication.

Note of clarification: A note of clarification will be used when a point needs to be emphasized or clarified in the text but it does not constitute a correction. Please note that any correction has to be highlighted as a stated erratum, corrigendum or note of clarification and the text cannot be amended. This is to make sure that the reader is aware of any changes to the text which they might have cited or referred to in their subsequent research or practice.

Expression of concern: In cases where a conclusion is unclear or where we are unable to make a fair decision due to conflicts of interest or lack of information, we will publish an expression of concern regarding the paper. An expression of concern will appear on the online version of the paper at the abstract level in order to ensure visibility for all readers, including non-subscribers.

1.2 Peer-review process

All papers appearing in SPE are peer-reviewed (double-blind). Advices from reviewers, experts in the field of the submitted publication, are given to contributors on their individual manuscript; reviewers may point out relevant published works which are not yet cited; and reviewed articles are treated confidentially prior to their publication. Reviewers are not part of SPE's editorial staff.

1.3 Reviewers' responsibilities

• To contribute to the decision-making process, and to assist in improving the quality of the published paper by reviewing the manuscript objectively, in a timely manner.
• To maintain the confidentiality of any information supplied by the editor or author, to not retain or copy the manuscript.
• To alert the editor to any published or submitted content that is substantially similar to that under review.
• To be aware of any potential conflicts of interest (financial, institutional, collaborative or other relationships between the reviewer and author) and to alert the editor to these, if necessary withdrawing their services for that manuscript.

1.4 Editors' responsibilities

• Editors will act and decide fairly, without discrimination on grounds of gender, sexual orientation, religious or political beliefs, ethnic or geographical origin of the authors.
• To deal with manuscript/submissions without commercial influence, so that articles are considered and accepted solely on their academic quality.

2 Procedures to deal with unethical behaviour

Ethical Issues arising in scholarly publishing are: • Plagiarism • Redundant publication (dual publication) • Self-plagiarism (sometimes known as text recycling) • Authorship issues • Coercive citation • Defamation/libel • Fabricated data • Unethical research and testing • Conflicts of interest.

2.1 Basic principles

Publishers and editors shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred; in no event SPE or its editors encourage such misconduct, or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place; in the event that a journal’s publisher or editors are made aware of any allegation of research misconduct the publisher or editor shall deal with allegations appropriately; SPE will retrace or correct articles when needed. Finally, publishers and editors should always be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed.

SPE reserves the right to withdraw and rescind any acceptance should a case of ethical misconduct be discovered prior to publication.

It will not be possible to please all parties in every case. Following a fair and considered process, the final decision in any disputed case will rest with the editor and SPE.

2.2 Grievance Procedure

The following Grievance Procedure outlines the process for addressing grievances by authors whose articles or other submissions are rejected for publication.

1. The grievance must be submitted in writing to the Editor of the journal within seven days following a submission being rejected for publication.
2. The grievance will be considered by the Editor and Editorial Advisory Board. The grievance will be resolved by taking a majority decision.
3. The grievance will be acknowledged with 10 days of receipt and aimed to be resolved within 30 days.
4. The decision will be in writing and will be final.

Please note that for legal reasons or when an article or chapter forms evidence in an independent hearing, we may not be able to take action until all matters have been fully resolved.

Please also note that SPE reserves the right to not proceed with a case if the complainant presents a false name or affiliation or acts in an inappropriate or threatening manner towards SPE editors and staff.

2.3 Plagiarism

SPE requires that all research submitted to the journals or books is original and the author agrees to these terms upon assignment and acceptance.

2.4 Redundant publication (also known as dual publication)

Authors are expected to submit original, previously unpublished content to SPE. It is unacceptable academic practice to submit to more than one journal at the same time – authors are expected to wait until receiving a decision from one journal before submitting to the next.

SPE will follow the Committee on Publication Ethics' flowcharts in cases of alleged redundant publication in submitted or published articles.

2.5 Text recycling (sometimes known as self-plagiarism)

Authors are expected to submit original content to SPE publications. It is only acceptable for research to be repeated if it leads to different or new conclusions or for comparisons with new data. In all cases, it is important to reference the previously published work.
If any element of the work has been published previously, you must ensure that this work is fully referenced and state it at the point of submission so that the Editor may make a fully-informed decision.

2.6 Authorship issues

In multi-authored papers, it is important that all authors that have made a significant contribution to the paper are listed. Those who have provided support but have not contributed to the research should be acknowledged in an Acknowledgements section.

Authorship issues fall into three main types:

1. The exclusion of a contributor from the list of authors
2. The inclusion of a named person who has not contributed to the paper or does not wish to be associated with the research
3. The order of the authors on the paper and the level of contribution that they have made to the paper.

SPE will endeavour to facilitate a resolution to an authorship dispute. However, as the research process is undertaken prior to the paper being submitted to SPE, it is not possible for SPE or the editors to comment on the level of contribution by each author. Please refer to the Committee on Publication Ethics' flowcharts for the processes that SPE follows in cases of authorship disputes in submitted or published articles.

If the matter cannot be resolved, SPE will refer the matter to the authors' institutions.

If all authors agree to a change to authorship on a paper, this will be presented as a corrigendum. A retraction notice will only be published when requested by all authors.

2.7 Coercive citation

During the peer review process, it is typical for authors to be directed by reviewers to papers which further develop and improve the author’s ideas.

Whilst there may be legitimate occasions where it is necessary to reference other publications, SPE regards ‘coercive citation’ (i.e. where a reference is included as a condition of acceptance or without academic justification) as unethical and does not condone this kind of behaviour.

SPE is an advocate of both author freedom and editorial independence. SPE urges any authors who feel they have been pressured to include a particular reference in their article, or Editors who are unclear on best ethical practice to contact the Publisher of the journal.

2.8 Defamation/libel

SPE requires that authors obtain written "proof of consent" for studies about named organizations or people.

If inaccurate, unsubstantiated or emotive statements are made about organizations or people in a submitted paper, SPE reserves the right to request changes to the text from the author or to reject the paper prior to publication.

Critiques and reviews of products and services are acceptable but comments must be constructive and must not be made maliciously. If statements have been made in a paper that is published by SPE and found to be defamatory, a retraction notice will be published. In some cases and when legally required, the paper will be withdrawn from the online version of the journal or book. An apology will be published in a forthcoming issue of the journal or volume of the book.

SPE will advise all authors of case studies to inform the subject (person or organization) and to seek permission. If SPE considers that the study could be potentially libellous, we will require written proof of consent before placing the paper into the production process.

2.9 Fabricated data

Please refer to the Committee on Publication Ethics' flowcharts for the processes that SPE follows in cases of fabricated data in submitted or published articles. As the research is conducted prior to the paper being submitted to an SPE journal or book, it is not possible for SPE or the editors to adjudicate in all cases. We will endeavour to facilitate a resolution and will refer the matter to the authors' institutions when appropriate.

2.10 Unethical research and testing

An author must follow appropriate international and national procedures with respect to data protection, rights to privacy, child protection and medical testing on humans and animals. Authors must make available all consent forms and requisite forms from the appropriate regulatory bodies to the editors and publishers at Emerald. Emerald encourages all authors to demonstrate how their research contributes to the benefit of society.

If research is found to contravene international or national procedures and this is confirmed with the appropriate regulatory body, SPE will publish a retraction notice.

2.11 Conflict of interest

All conflicts of interest should be declared by the author, editor or reviewer.

Conflicts of interest include:

• A financial or personal interest in the outcomes of the research;
• Undisclosed financial support for the research by an interested third party;
• A financial or personal interest in the suppression of the research;

A note to highlight the background to financial support for the research from third parties or any other possible conflict of interest must be added to the paper prior to review.

If a conflict of interest is suspected, then this should be reported to the editor or SPE. A concern regarding an editor should be raised with the journal publisher or book commissioning editor at SPE. SPE will follow the flowcharts presented in cases of a suspected conflict of interest.

In all cases, SPE will:

• Act professionally and efficiently • Be fair and objective • Always approach the accused party to establish their position before making a decision or committing to a course of action • Ensure that we provide sufficient time for all parties to respond • Keep all parties informed of decisions, including the copyright owners, editors and authors • As members of the Committee on Publication Ethics, follow the processes highlighted in the flowcharts presented.

It is SPE's responsibility to protect authors' moral rights (to be acknowledged as the author and not to be misrepresented) and to ensure the correct record of the literature.

3 Copyright and access

Print copies appear at the same time as the electronic version, both are available for subscribers and members.

The subscriber receives a print copy of the issues by mail. The electronic version is freely available to the subscriber for one year to count from the date on the invoice. He receives therefore a login and a password. The password expires after one year. At every renewal order a new password will be given. Copyright belongs to ICIWO vzw, Leiekaai 25, 9000 Gent, Belgium. No part of this journal may be reproduced in any form, by print, photo print, microfilm or any other means without written permission from the publisher.

4 Archiving

A paper version of each volume of SPE, from the beginning in 1964, is archived in the physical archive of ICIWO vzw. A digital archive of the print SPE volumes collection is being maintained on a Windows Server system, and it is in a process of providing to the public gradual access through Lotuswebtec/SPE internet servers.

5 Publishing schedule

SPE is published 2 times per year, issue 1 in March and issue 2 in September.

6 Further information

For further information on SPE’s ethics policies, please contact 该邮件地址已受到反垃圾邮件插件保护。要显示它需要在浏览器中启用 JavaScript。.

We strive to improve our website and services at every time. This may imply changes on the website. We thank you to contact us for suggestions or questions.