Manuscripts are reviewed in the editorial management consisting of assessing the adequacy of article and in the mutually anonymous review process by two experts. Texts are assessed solely on the basis of their professional level, regardless of the theoretical or ideological orientation, political views, religion, nationality, race, ethnicity, gender or sexual orientation. The editors make every effort to preserve the impartiality of the review process so as not to reveal identities of participants of the review process. The author, whose paper has evidence of plagiarism or falsification of data, he / she loses the opportunity to publish in the Journal of Valuation and Expertness.
The following principles of ethical practice in preparing and publishing scientific peer-reviewed Journal of Valuation and Expertness are based on documents COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics): COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. Reviewers and authors are expected to become familiar with the originals of the documents listed above COPE.
Authors must respect the requirement of originality; two identical or similar texts must not be submitted for publication in various journals, proceedings, etc., in paper or electronic form. Authors are required to express their expertise with maximum precision, while respecting intellectual property rights and laws relating to the copyright. Authorial manuscripts must stimulate a serious discussion on the investigation and provide the necessary relevant information, quotes and links. It is considered unacceptable for the author to include any part of another text or research results from other works into a submitted manuscript without the accurate quote of the author of the original source. Using texts or other sources without stating original authors is considered plagiarism.
Sources must be properly cited and information obtained. Personal contact must not be used without the written consent of the source. The authorship of the article is limited to the individuals who have significantly contributed to the publication of the article. All co- authors who have significantly contributed to the formation of the article must be listed in the article. Plagiarism, inaccurate or false statements, falsification of data and resubmission of already published manuscript are considered unacceptable and unethical.
The review process is a part of the peer review process of an article. The aim of the review process is to assess the technical quality of the article and to suggest to the author possible modifications, which will lead to increase in professional quality of the article. Reviewers assist editors in deciding on the publication of the manuscript and assist authors in improving the quality of manuscripts. If a reviewer does not feel sufficiently entitled to evaluate the manuscript, he / she shall notify this to an editorial office which means that he / she withdraws from the evaluation process.
Reviewers assess manuscripts in an anonymised form and must maintain confidentiality about elements of the manuscript. Reviewers will assess the submitted manuscripts objectively and without personal criticism of the author; they express understandably their attitude and their recommendations support with relevant arguments. All recommendations, arguments and conclusions proposed by reviewers, must be properly cited by the author, if they are used in the text. Within the assessment, reviewers should reveal any of author’s substantial misconduct against the publication ethics and the ethics of research in social work, and they are to inform the editorial board of these circumstances. Reviewers must not quote from the manuscript without the written consent of the author, or to use material from unpublished manuscripts for their own work or that of others.
The editorial board decides which articles to accept and publish. Editorial Board strives to fulfil the mission of the journal and has the right to reject articles that contain plagiarism, offensive or defamatory content, or those that are in conflict with the copyright law. Members of the Editorial Board, reviewers of articles and editorial staff evaluate manuscripts without personal bias for or against the authors or institutions. Members of the editorial staff must not cite the author’s manuscript without a written permission; they must not use material from unpublished manuscripts for their own work or the work of other authors. Members of the editorial staff must not distribute copies of the manuscript in printed or electronic form, except editorial work. Editors are obliged to reject manuscripts, which in their opinion cause conflict of interest.
Responsibility for the academic quality of the journal and observance of ethical principles is borne by publication editors and editorial board of the journal. Attitudes and opinions of the editorial board may differ from the views and opinions of the reviewers. Reviews are the expert observations on the basis of the editors and editorial board decides the final publication of peer-reviewed articles. Editors and editorial board makes the final decision on the publication of the article before the author is informed by the editorial staff about the (un) publishing an article in a journal.