Ethics Statement

JOURNAL CODE OF ETHICS

The principles underlying Ostraka, Journal of Antiquities, are based on values of ethical integrity and scientific autonomy. The Steering Committee, the authors, the editorial staff and the reviewers share and take responsibility for the principles listed based on the guidelines ("Core Practices") developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics - COPE.

 

1. Responsibilities of the Management Committee and management of the Journal
   • The Journal’s Management Committee decides whether to publish the proposed articles.
   • The Committee evaluates proposals for articles irrespective of their source and without any form of financial contribution which might affect decisions, thus ensuring that there is no commercial logic which could undermine the Journal's ethical principles and intellectual quality.
   • The Committee ensures freedom of expression and assesses articles submitted for publication solely based on their content, without discrimination against authors, regardless of gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, political opinions or other personal characteristics.
   • The Committee is committed to ensuring that rigorous peer review processes are in place, ensuring the quality and integrity of published material and that competent reviewers are selected without conflicts of interest.
   • The Committee shall endeavour to maintain the confidentiality of information relating to submitted articles and shall not disclose it to anyone other than the author.
   • The Committee welcomes, with openness, reasoned criticisms concerning the published works and does not exclude the possibility of publishing them within the same journal.
   • The Committee shall ensure that corrections, clarifications and retractions are published, when necessary while maintaining a transparent approach. It also places no restrictions on the publication of contributions which present conclusions that differ from those of earlier publications in the Review.
   • The Committee ensures that the Journal maintains an open dialogue with readers, answering their questions and the issues raised.

 

2. Authors and contributions

2.1 The decision to approve or reject a contribution for publication is based solely on its scientific relevance, originality and clarity, as well as consistency with the themes of the Review. In any case, the quality of the arguments will be given more excellent value than the sheer quantity of bibliographical references.

2.2 Authors must submit an entirely original work and cite in an accurate and detailed manner only the sources consulted.

2.3 Authors should avoid publishing articles that describe the same research in detail on multiple platforms. Simultaneously, presenting the exact text to different editorial offices, both paper and digital, is considered an ethically incorrect and unacceptable behaviour.

2.4 Authors must indicate in the text references to research programmes and organisations or bodies which have funded their work.

2.5 If an author finds a significant error or inaccuracy in his article, he must inform the Committee promptly, providing all necessary information for making the required corrections.

2.6 Authors are allowed to respond to criticism received.

 

3. Conflict of interest and plagiarism

3.1 The Committee and the editorial staff undertake not to use the contents of an article submitted for publication without the author's written consent.

3.2 Authors are required to disclose any potential conflict of interest.

3.3 The Committee must act promptly in cases of suspected plagiarism or conflict of interest in published or published articles and take all necessary measures to address the situation appropriately.

3.4 The selected reviewers are required to report any potential conflict of interest in a timely manner.

 

4. Peer-review process

4.1 Peer review is a process that supports and complements the decisions of the Steering Committee regarding proposed articles, offering authors the opportunity to improve and enrich their contributions.

4.2 All process steps are carried out according to the protocol established by the Review.

4.3 The peer-review procedure adopted by the Journal ensures the confidentiality of the individual identities of the reviewers and the overall database.

4.4 The peer-review rules are also applied to members of the Management Committee of the Journal who propose their work for publication.

4.5 If the reviewer believes that he is not suitable for the task assigned or knows that he cannot complete the reading in the required time, he must inform the Committee promptly to allow the identification of other reviewers.

4.6 Each text submitted for reading shall be treated as confidential. Therefore, such texts shall not be shared or discussed with other persons without the explicit permission of the Steering Committee.

4.7 Peer-review must be carried out objectively. Reviewers are obliged to provide clear and adequate reasons for their judgements.

4.8 The reviewers are required to indicate precisely which fundamental works have been omitted by the author. They must also report to the Committee any similarity or overlap of the text received for reading with other works known to them.

4.9 Confidential information or information obtained during the peer review process shall be treated as confidential and may not be used for personal purposes.

Contributions submitted to the Ostraka magazine for publication will be evaluated through a peer-review process with double anonymity. The acceptance procedure involves a first stage of examination by the management, which will assess compliance with the editorial line of the journal and the principles of the adopted code of ethics. The decision to proceed with publication will be communicated within three weeks. In a second phase, the paper will be sent for peer review to two experts on the topic who have the necessary expertise to assess the methodological correctness and contents of the submitted article. Their names will be kept in a special list by the journal management, which will take care to archive them, ensuring anonymity. The reviewers will express positive (A), negative (B) or reservations (C) within the two-week deadline. The journal guarantees mutual anonymity between reviewers and author/author according to the double-masked (double-anonymized) method. In the event of a strong disagreement between the two reviewers, the Management and the Editorial Board reserve the right to request an additional opinion and initiate a second review cycle. Contacts between management, reviewers, and authors/authors will be made via e-mail. Upon request, the Management may disclose the identity of reviewers and authors/authors only at the end of the review process and solely to allow direct contact. Authors/reviewers are invited to contact the Directorate in case of any dispute or report. Once the publication process has started, the Directorate will interface with the Editorial Board to manage this process. Even after the start of this process, the Management reserves the right to interrupt the procedure by not continuing with the publication of the article if the author refuses to accept the suggestions made by the publisher or fails to comply with the reviewers' recommendations. In case of a favourable opinion, or if modifications are necessary, the author must make the interventions requested to the contribution and send it again to the Editorial Board within two weeks from the last communication.

 

5. Data and intellectual property

5.1 The Committee shall ensure that information is protected and kept confidential and that copyright is respected.

5.2 The work's authorship is attributed exclusively to those who have contributed preponderantly and significantly to the conception, organization and realization. People who have been involved in relevant phases of the research must be explicitly recognised.

5.3 Authors are required to store and archive data relating to their published research.