Publication Ethics Statement
Regarding publication ethics Hungarian Geographical Bulletin follows the guidelines recommended by COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics). All submitting authors should ensure that the highest ethical standards are upheld both in the conduct of research and the publication of its results. Any evidence of plagiarism or serial publication of manuscripts with similar content will result in the immediate termination of the review process. The publication of a work in Hungarian Geographical Bulletin is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. We are committed to upholding the integrity of the work we publish. Therefore, we consider the following standards of expected ethical behaviour in the process of publishing very seriously for all parties involved: the authors, the editors and the reviewers.
Authors are expected to ensure that their submitted article is original, fully attributed, and does not contain material that is untrue, inaccurate or plagiarised. An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Authors must not submit the same manuscript or substantial parts of it to another journal simultaneously.
If the authors have used the work and/or words of others that should be appropriately cited or quoted. Also, publications that have been influential in determining the research work and the reported results should be properly cited. Additional information obtained privately (e.g. conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties), must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Plagiarism in all its forms (including copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper without attribution) constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable. Authors are responsible for ensuring that all appropriate permissions and approvals for copyrighted material have been obtained. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements are also unacceptable.
Authorship should be limited only to those who have made a significant contribution to the conceptual development, design, execution of the research, or the interpretation of research results. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the title page of the manuscript, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and its submission to Hungarian Geographical Bulletin. Others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project and organisations providing financial support for the project should be properly acknowledged.
The Editorial Team of the journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. This decision is driven by Reviewers’ comments, the originality of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers in the field. The Editor-in-Chief may consult with editorial board members or reviewers in making the final decision. Managing Editors evaluates new submissions solely for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, and ideological or political orientation of the authors. They also check the formal requirements (e.g. length of papers, quality of illustrations), apply plagiarism checking programs, and suggest potential reviewers from the field. Authors have the right to appeal against editorial decisions. This must be in written form, and be sent to the Editor-in-Chief directly. After evaluating the situation and consulting with other members of the editorial board the Editor-in-Chief makes a final decision on the grounds of the journal’s standards. Authors receive a written answer to their appeal.
Members of the Editorial Team do not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers and others, involved in the publishing process. Unpublished materials included in a submitted manuscript are never used in an editor’s own research. Editors should ask another member of the editorial board member to handle the submission if they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors
The Editorial Team takes responsive measures when ethical or other complaints appeals have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper. Such measures generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institution and research bodies. If the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant. Every reported act of unethical publishing behaviour must be looked into, even if it discovered years after publication.
The primary task of reviewers is to assist the editorial board in making editorial decisions. Reviewers should disclose interests that might appear to affect their ability to review the work objectively. These might include personal, political, or religious interests or conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers. Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript should notify the editor and decline the review process. Reviews should be conducted objectively and reviewers should:
- strive to act fairly and transparently using the journal’s review sheet;
- treat the manuscript as confidential document, and must not show or discuss it with others;
- express their views clearly during the review process with supporting arguments;
- identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors;
- inform editors about any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other paper of which they have personal knowledge;
Unpublished results disclosed in a manuscript under review must not be used in a reviewer’s own research. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.