Stoa is committed to compliance and respect for ethical behavior standards at all stages of the publishing process. Our journal follows the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines defined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) for journal editors, as well as the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing published in 2022 by COPE, alongside the DOAJ (Directory of Open Access Journals), OASPA (Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association), and WAME (World Association of Medical Editors).

1. Responsibility of Authors

Submitted texts must be the result of original and unpublished research. They must include the data obtained and used, as well as an objective discussion of the results. Sufficient information must be provided so that any specialist can replicate the research and confirm or refute the interpretations defended in the work.

Authors must be aware of and refrain from engaging in scientific misconduct or infringing upon publication ethics.

Authors must present their results with clarity and honesty, without falsification or inappropriate manipulation of data.

Authors must ensure that the data and results presented in the work are original and have not been copied, invented, distorted, or manipulated.

Plagiarism in all its forms, multiple or redundant publication, and the invention or manipulation of data constitute serious ethical breaches and are considered scientific fraud.

Authors must provide appropriate authorship and recognition. They must refrain from deliberately misrepresenting a scientist's relationship with the published work. All authors must have contributed significantly to the research.

Authors must inform the editor of any direct or indirect conflict of interest with the editors or members of the Editorial Team or the International Scientific Committee.

No significant part of the article shall have been previously published (either as an article or a book chapter) or be under consideration for publication elsewhere.

When an author discovers a serious error in their work, they are obligated to notify the journal as soon as possible to modify, withdraw, or retract the article, or to publish a correction or erratum.

If a potential error is detected by any member of the Editorial Team, the author is obliged to demonstrate that their work is correct.

Authors are required to participate in a peer-review process for all submitted materials.

Authors who use AI tools in writing a manuscript, creating images or graphic elements for the article, or collecting and analyzing data, must indicate which AI tool was used. Authors are fully responsible for the content of their manuscript, including parts generated by an AI tool, and are therefore liable for any breaches of editorial ethics.

 

2. Responsibility of Editors

The Editorial Team shall be impartial when managing works proposed for publication and must respect the intellectual independence of authors, who must be granted the right of reply in the event of a negative evaluation.
Members of the Editorial Team are obligated to maintain confidentiality regarding the texts received and their content until they have been accepted for publication. Only then may the title and authorship be disclosed.
Furthermore, no member of the Editorial Team or reviewers may use data, arguments, or interpretations contained in unpublished works for their own research without the express written consent of the authors.

 

2.1. Publication Decision

All contributions will be initially evaluated by the Editorial Team. The Team is solely responsible for selecting, processing, and deciding which articles meet the editorial objectives and could therefore be published. Each document considered suitable is sent to two independent reviewers, experts in their field and capable of evaluating the specific qualities of the work. The Editor is responsible for the final decision on whether the document is accepted or rejected.
The decision to publish an article will always be measured by its importance to researchers, professionals, and potential readers. Editors must make impartial decisions regardless of commercial considerations.
Editors who make final decisions on manuscripts must recuse themselves if they have conflicts of interest or relationships that pose potential problems. Responsibility for the final decision will be assigned to an editor without any conflict of interest.

2.2. Review of Works

The Editorial Team will ensure that published research papers have been evaluated by at least two specialists in the field and that the review process has been fair and impartial. Reviewed articles are treated confidentially by the editorial team and reviewers.
The Editorial Team will value and appreciate the contribution of those who have collaborated in evaluations. They shall dispense with reviewers who provide low-quality, incorrect, disrespectful, or overdue evaluations.

2.3. Identification and Prevention of Misconduct

In no case will members of the Editorial Team or the International Editorial Committee encourage misconduct of any kind or knowingly allow such behavior to occur. They will attempt to prevent misconduct by informing authors and reviewers of the ethical behavior required of them.
Reviewers and editorial/scientific team members will be asked to remain vigilant for all types of misconduct to identify documents where research misconduct may have occurred and handle allegations accordingly.
In the event of misconduct, the Journal Editor is responsible for resolving the issue. They may work in conjunction with the Editorial Team, the International Editorial Committee, reviewers, and subject matter experts.
Issues will be documented accordingly. All factual questions must be recorded: who, what, when, where, and why. All relevant documents, particularly the articles in question, must be preserved.
The General Editor will contact the author, providing them the opportunity to respond or comment on the complaint, allegation, or dispute.
In cases where misconduct has occurred or appears to have occurred, or if corrections are necessary, the Editorial Team will handle the cases following COPE recommendations. Care will be taken to distinguish between honest human error and the deliberate intent to defraud.
The Editorial Team will consider withdrawing a publication in case of misconduct, issuing a note in case of inconclusive evidence, or requesting the correction of a false segment.

3. Responsibility of Reviewers

Reviewers must be aware of and take into account the editorial policy and the publication’s ethics and malpractice statement.
The journal requires potential reviewers to have scientific expertise or significant work experience in a relevant field. They must have recently conducted research and gained recognized expertise among their peers. They must provide accurate personal and professional information.
Reviewers must recuse themselves if they are not qualified to evaluate a manuscript, if they believe their evaluation will not be objective, or if they have a conflict of interest.
Reviewers must point out relevant published work that has not yet been cited. If necessary, the editor may issue a request for correction to this effect.
Reviewers are requested to identify documents where research misconduct may have occurred and inform the editorial committee.

4. Conflict of Interest

Members of the Editorial Team and reviewers will recuse themselves in case of a conflict of interest regarding an author or the content of a manuscript. All conflicts of interest between authors, reviewers, and members of the editorial team and scientific committee shall be avoided.
Editors and reviewers must refrain from decision-making when:

A direct relationship exists between an author and a reviewer.

There is a recent and significant professional collaboration between reviewers and authors.

An editor or reviewer is a collaborator in the submitted project.

The editor or reviewer has a financial interest in a company or a competing company with a financial interest in the submission.

The editor or reviewer believes they cannot be objective for personal reasons or financial interests not otherwise covered by the policy.