ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR EDITORS, REVIEWERS AND AUTHORS
As the publisher of the Economic Studies journal, Economic Research Institute of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences fulfils its duties of protection of the publishing activity with the utmost care at all stages and applies high ethical standards and good practices. In their work, the Editorial Board and the International Advisory Board of the journal fully comply with the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), available at: https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Guidelines
DUTIES OF THE EDITORIAL BOARD
The Editorial Board of Economic Studies journal applies in its work the good practices presented in the Ethics Toolkit for Successful Editorial office of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
Decisions to publish a submitted article
The Editor-in-Chief of Economic Studies journal, after consulting with the members of the Editorial Board, makes decisions on which manuscripts submitted to the journal should be published. Decisions are made on the basis of double-blind peer reviews, which verify and evaluate the submitted article and its relevance to the researchers and the readers. The Editorial Board is guided by the journal’s policy but also complies with any current restrictions by the legal requirements in force at the time of publication of the relevant material, including those relating to libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
Selection and control of the reviewers
The Editorial Board ensures that the review process is fair, unbiased and without delay. It selects reviewers who have relevant expertise in the field and follows best practices to avoid selecting fraudulent reviewers. The Editorial Board monitors potential conflicts of interest and self-citation suggestions made by reviewers to determine if there is potential for bias.
Non-discrimination
Articles are judged on their intellectual content regardless of the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, nationality, citizenship, or political affiliation of the authors.
Journal metrics
The Editorial Board should not attempt to influence the journal’s ranking by artificially inflating any journal metric. In particular, the editor will not require the inclusion of references to articles in the journal except for genuine scientific reasons.
Confidentiality
The Editorial Board should respect the confidentiality of all articles submitted to the journal and all communications with reviewers. Privileged information or ideas disclosed in a submitted article should be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.
Use of generative Artificial Intelligence (AI)
The Editorial Board should not upload a submitted article or any part of it to an AI generating tool, as this may violate the authors’ privacy and property rights.Generative artificial intelligence or AI-assisted technologies should not be used by editors to assist in the manuscript evaluation or decision-making process, as the critical thinking and original evaluation required for this work is beyond the scope of this technology and there is a risk that the technology will generate incorrect, incomplete or biased conclusions about the article. The editor is responsible for the editorial process, the final decision and its communication to the authors.
Disclosure and prevention of conflicts of interest
Under no circumstances shall unpublished article or ideas described in an article, submitted for peer review, be used by the Editorial Board members in their own research without the express written consent of the author. Strictly confidential information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not be used for personal gain. Editorial board members should decline to review manuscripts if a conflict of interest arises concerning competition, collaboration, or other relationships or affiliations with any of the authors, organizations, or (possibly) institutions associated with the materials. The Editorial Board should require authors to disclose relevant competing interests and to publish corrections if, after the publication of their article, it is discovered that such competing interests are present.
Interference and cooperation in investigations
ERI at BAS (together with the Editorial Board) will take appropriate action in response to the submission of a complaint of ethical misconduct in a submitted manuscript or published material. Typically, these measures include contacting the author of the article (unpublished or published) and determining the validity of the complaint received or claims made. Notifications may also be sent to the appropriate institutions and research organizations. If the complaint is found to be substantiated, a correction, rebuttal, as appropriate should be published, or other action should be taken. A decision must be made in regard to any information received about non-compliance with ethical standards in editorial activity and action must be taken, even if the violation is discovered years after the publication of the article in question.
DUTIES OF REVIEWERS
The reviewers of Economic Studies journal are guided in their work by the Ethical Guidelines for Reviewers the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
Contributing to the decisions of the Editorial Board
The reviews help the Editorial Board in making decisions for publication and, through the exchange of information with the author and the Editorial Board, can also contribute to the improvement of the submitted article. Reviews are an essential component of formal communication between scholars. The Editorial Board of Economic Studies journal share the view that all scholars who wish to contribute to scholarly publications assume the duty to participate in the peer review process. Any person selected as a reviewer who feels inadequately qualified to review the research in an article, or is aware that he/she cannot meet the deadline for the assigned review, should notify the Editorial Board forthwith and not commit to writing the review
Confidentiality
All articles received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Under no circumstances may they be shown to or discussed with others except in cases when the Editor-in-Chief has given a permission for this (in exceptional and extraordinary circumstances). This obligation also applies to persons invited as reviewers who have declined to write a review.
Use of generative Artificial Intelligence (AI)
Reviewers should not upload a submitted article or any part of it to an AI generating tool, as this may violate the authors’ privacy and property rights. Generative artificial intelligence or AI-assisted technologies should not be used by editors to assist in the manuscript evaluation or decision-making process, as the critical thinking and original evaluation required for this work is beyond the scope of this technology and there is a risk that the technology will generate incorrect, incomplete or biased conclusions about the article. The editor is responsible for the editorial process, the final decision and its communication to the authors.
Standards of objectivity
Reviews should be written in compliance with the standards of objectivity. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate and unacceptable. Reviewers should express their views clearly and provide relevant arguments in favour of their opinions. Reviewers should consult with the editor when they have potential conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or affiliations with any of the authors. If a reviewer suggests that an author include citations to the reviewer’s work (or his collaborators), it must be for genuine scientific reasons and not with the intention of increasing the reviewer’s citation count or improving the visibility of his work (or that of his collaborators).
DUTIES OF AUTHORS
Standards for submitting articles for publication
Authors of articles containing results of original research should correctly describe the work they have done and its objective significance. The article should accurately present the main data used as evidence. Each article should contain sufficient details and references so that others can reproduce the work done. Falsifications or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
Access to and storage of data
When submitting an article to the journal, authors may be required to provide the source data from their research with the article for the purposes of the peer review process, and they should be prepared to make this data publicly available if practicable. In any case, they should be able to provide access to this data to other competent persons for a period of at least 10 years after publication, provided that the confidentiality of the participants is protected and the legal rights of the owner of the data permit its disclosure.
Originality or plagiarism
Authors must ensure that they have written and submitted to the journal an entirely original work, and if they have used works and/or phrases from other authors, these citations should be properly acknowledged as such. Plagiarism takes many forms, ranging from copying someone else’s material and passing it off as one’s own, to copying significant portions of someone else’s material (without attribution), to claiming research results conducted by other authors as one’s own. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical behaviour in the publication of scientific material and is unacceptable.
Submission/publication of the same article in several journals
The general rule is that an author should not publish articles describing broadly the same research in more than one edition or as the same primary (main) publication. Submitting the same article to more than one journal simultaneously constitutes unethical behaviour in the practice of scholarly publishing and is unacceptable. An author may not submit material already published to another journal for consideration. The Editorial Board of the journal should have explicitly provided consent to the author in case of secondary publication, which must certainly reflect the same data and interpretations as in the primary document. The secondary publication must also cite and refer to the primary material.
Authorship of the manuscript
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the concept, design, execution, or interpretation of the research. All persons who have made significant contributions to a scientific study should be listed as co-authors. In cases where there are other contributors to certain significant aspects of a research project besides the authors, there should be an acknowledgment of their involvement or they should appear on a list of contributors. The corresponding author must ensure that only all the actual co-authors are included in the article and that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the final version of the article and have given their consent to its submission for publication. Authors are expected to carefully consider the list and order of authors before submitting their manuscript and to provide the final list of authors at the time of initial submission. Only in exceptional circumstances may the Editor-in-Chief consider adding, deleting or rearranging authors after the article has been submitted. All authors must agree to any such addition, removal or rearrangement.
Use of generative Artificial Intelligence (AI)
When authors use generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process, those technologies should only be used to improve the readability and language of the work. The application of the technology should be done with human supervision and control, and authors should carefully review and edit the output, since AI may generate output that is incorrect, incomplete, or biased. Authors are ultimately responsible for the content of the work.Authors must declare in their manuscript the use of AI and AI-assisted technologies, which maintains transparency and trust between authors, readers, reviewers and editors. Authors must not credit AI and AI-assisted technologies as an author or co-author, nor cite AI as an author.
Dangers and people
If the work involves procedures that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author should clearly identify them in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of humans, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in accordance with relevant laws and that the relevant institutional committees approved them. Personal space and human rights must always be respected.
Conflict of interests
A conflict of interest is defined as a financial commitment or relationship that may affect the objectivity, integrity, or interpretation of the proposed manuscript. All authors should disclose in their articles any material conflicts of interest, financial or otherwise, that could be seen to influence the results of their research or the interpretation of their articles. Co-authors and any sources of financial support for a research project should be acknowledged. Examples of potential conflicts of interest, which must be disclosed, include a place of employment, consultancies, interests in commercial companies, fees received, expert reports paid, patent applications/registrations, grants, and other forms of research funding. All potential conflicts of interest should be identified as early as possible.
Fundamental errors in published papers
When an author discovers a fundamental error or inaccuracy in his/her own published material, he/she must promptly notify the journal’s Editorial Board or publisher and assist them in having the article recalled or corrected. If the Editorial Board of the journal or the publisher learns from a third party that a published article contains a material error, the author has a duty to recall or correct the article promptly or to provide the Editorial Board of the journal with evidence of the accuracy of the original article.