The Publication Ethics Statement establishes the ethical standards that all participants in the publishing process are expected to be adhered to. Compliance with accepted international standards of publication ethics, as developed by the Code of Conduct and the Best Practice Guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), is an essential part of the editorial board’s policy and aims to maintain the high quality of the journal. All those involved in the process of preparing issues of the journal (authors, reviewers, editors) are expected to adhere strictly to the standards of ethical conduct and to carry out their commitments in accordance with the principles of professional ethics in the following main ways.

1. All submitted manuscripts must be original research that has not been published or submitted for review in other journals. Submitting a manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously is considered unethical and unacceptable behavior.
2. Authors should be honest about data, results, methods, and publication rules. They should be unbiased and objective in their analysis and interpretation of historical sources, and should not allow any falsification of data, including by manipulating it to prove a pre-formulated hypothesis.
3. It is a mandatory requirement for authors to respect intellectual property and bibliographical accumulations, and not to allow plagiarism in any form. They must strictly adhere to the requirements of scientifical research, impartiality, and compliance with language norms.
4. Authors are responsible for the copyright of the materials and other intellectual and artistic products used in their articles.
5. Authors should respond promptly to the editors’ queries regarding primary data, clarifications of text or copyright; comply with the reviewers’ comments and instructions (if any); and resubmit their manuscript after making appropriate corrections.
6. Authors should inform the editorial board of any significant inaccuracies or errors they notice after submission and during the publication process.
7. Authors must declare in their manuscript any financial or other conflicts of interest that could be interpreted as influencing the conclusions and interpretations in the text. The sources of funding that supported the preparation of the manuscript, if any, must be openly disclosed. Declarations of conflicts of interest should be made in a letter submitted to the editorial board with the manuscript.
8. In order to ensure a smooth publishing process, the Editorial Board encourages authors to register with ORCID (Open Researcher and Contributor ID) and to submit their ORCID identifier at the same time as their manuscript submission. This is the publishers’ preference but is not a requirement for authors. The current ORCID registration website is at https://orcid.org/.

1. Reviewers must be among the most competent scholars in the relevant scientific field. They are required to notify the editor in cases where they are not qualified to review a scientific paper or are unable to review a paper accurately enough.
2. The deadline for reviewing a manuscript is one month after the reviewer’s commitment. Delays in peer review are unacceptable.
3. Reviewers are required to declare any possible conflict of interest that could affect their review.
4. The reviewer is required to evaluate the submitted manuscript in accordance to the scientific criteria. He/she shall clearly express his/her opinion and support it with objective arguments and constructive criticism.
5. The reviewer is obliged to ensure the correctness of citations. He/she must promptly inform the editorial board in cases of incorrect citation or of noticed duplication of parts of the material with an already published article.
6. Any manuscript to be peer-reviewed must be treated as a confidential document. It is not permissible for the reviewer to discuss it or show it to third parties, except when authorized by the journal editor, or to use ideas and information contained in it for his/her own interest.
7. If the evaluations of the two reviewers differ significantly, the work is sent to a third reviewer. The final decision to publish a submitted manuscript is made by the editorial team. Once made, the final decision cannot be changed unless, in the case of a positive decision, serious fraud is detected in the accepted paper.

1. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for every text published in the journal, guaranteeing the quality of the published material.
2. The Editor-in-Chief ensures that research material published in the journal is in accordance with internationally accepted ethical guidelines recommended by COPE.
3. The Editor-in-Chief should take appropriate action when ethical complaints are received about a manuscript submitted for publication or about a manuscript already published.
4. The editorial board is obliged to arrange for a rapid peer review and to consider each submission, taking a clear view and communicating it to the author as soon as possible. The author will be notified of the beginning and end of each stage of the approval process.
5. The editorial team makes the final determination on the merits and demerits of a manuscript. It is obliged to notify the author of any weaknesses and errors, without the correction of which the article will not be published. These include technical deficiencies as well as factual and methodological errors; incorrect, insufficient or unethical citation; outright plagiarism, etc.
6. Commercial considerations do not affect editorial decisions and articles are accepted solely on the basis of their scientific merit. The editorial decision is made without regard to the author’s gender, nationality, citizenship, academic or institutional position, religious affiliation, political or sexual orientation.
7. Ideas or information acquired in the process of evaluating material submitted for publication are strictly confidential and shall not be used for personal gain.
8. The editorial board ensures that the peer review process is conducted in a way that all identities are protected in accordance with the principle of bilateral anonymity, whereby the reviewers and the author of the article remain anonymous to each other.
9. The avoidance of conflicts of interest is a guiding principle for the editorial board.
10. The editorial board publishes and maintains regularly updated guidelines for reviewers on everything that is expected of them and that relates to their essential role in the evaluation.
11. Editors actively seek feedback from authors and reviewers to improve the editing process.