Publication Ethics

Duties of Editors

Our ethic statements concerning the duties of the editors of the Journal of Constitutional History are based on COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics), Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors: http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/Best_Practice.pdf.
The editors of the Journal are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the Journal should be published.
They are guided by the policies of the Journal’s International Board and constrained by the laws in force.
They actively work to improve the quality of their Journal.
The editors evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political orientation of the authors.
The editors and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher.
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author.

Duties of Reviewers

Our ethic statements concerning the duties of reviewers are based on http://www.njcmindia.org/home/about/22.
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts which can give birth to conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Duties of Authors

Our ethic statements concerning the duties of authors are based on http://www.elsevier.com/framework_products/promis_misc/ethicalguidelinesforauthors.pdf.
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the article. This should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
Usually, authors should not publish manuscripts presenting the same research in more than one journal or primary publication.
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors are included on the article, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the article and have agreed to its submission to the Journal for its publication.
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the Journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.