Ethical principles in force in the journal “Contemporary Economy” are based on the COPE guidelines(1)

Editorial Principles

As editors of the “Contemporary Economy”, we understand that the most important of our duties is to maintain a high standard in the scholarly literature.

Authorship and responsibility

“Contemporary Economy” has a clear policy on authorship that follows the standards within the relevant field. We give guidance in their information for authors on what is expected of an author and, if there are different authorship conventions within a field, we state which they adhere to. For multidisciplinary and collaborative research, it be apparent to readers who has done what and who takes responsibility for the conduct and validity of which aspect of the research. Each part of the work should have at least one author who takes responsibility for its validity. All authors are expected to have contributed significantly to the paper and to be familiar with its entire content and ideally, this should be declared in an authorship statement submitted to the journal. When there are undisputed changes in authorship for appropriate reasons, we as a editors require that all authors (including any whose names are being removed from an author list) agree on these in writing.

Conflicts of interest and role of the funding source

In our Journal we have policies that require all authors to declare any relevant financial and non-financial conflicts of interest and publish at least those that might influence a reader’s perception of a paper. The funding source of the research should be declared and published, and the role of the funding source in the conception, conduct, analysis, and reporting of the research should be stated and published.

Ensuring the integrity of the published record – corrections

When genuine errors in published work are pointed out by readers, authors, or editors, which do not render the work invalid, a correction (or erratum) we will be published as soon as possible. If serious concerns are raised by readers, reviewers, or others, about the conduct, validity, or reporting of academic work, we as editors will contact the authors and allow them to respond to the concerns. If that response is unsatisfactory, we take this to the institutional level (including the notification of the disputed article to the appropriate authorities).

Full information on the responsibility for editors:

The responsibility of the authors

Responsible research publication
  • The research being reported should have been conducted in an ethical and the responsible manner and follow all relevant legislation.
  • Researchers should use appropriate methods of data analysis and presentation.
  • Authors should take collective responsibility for their work and for the content of their publications. Researchers should check their publications carefully at all stages to ensure methods and findings are reported accurately.
  • Researchers should present their results honestly and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation.
  • Researchers should strive to describe their methods and to present their findings clearly and unambiguously.
  • Reports of research should be complete. They should not omit inconvenient, inconsistent or inexplicable findings or results that do not support the authors’ or sponsors’ hypothesis or interpretation.
  • Research funders and sponsors should not be able to veto publication of findings that do not favour their product or position.
  • Authors should alert the editor promptly if they discover an error in any submitted, accepted or published work. Authors should cooperate with editors in issuing corrections or retractions when required.
  • Authors should represent the work of others accurately in citations and quotations.
  • Authors should not copy references from other publications if they have not read the cited work.
  • New findings should be presented in the context of previous research. The work of others should be fairly represented.
  • Authors should adhere to publication requirements that submitted work is original and has not been published elsewhere in any language.
  • Applicable copyright laws and conventions should be followed. Copyright material should be reproduced only with appropriate permission and acknowledgement.
  • Relevant previous work and publications, both by other researchers and the authors’ own, should be properly acknowledged and referenced.
  • Data, text, figures or ideas originated by other researchers should be properly acknowledged and should not be presented as if they were the authors’ own. Original wording taken directly from publications by other researchers should appear in quotation marks with the appropriate citations.
  • Authors should inform editors if findings have been published previously or if multiple reports or multiple analyses of a single data set are under consideration for publication elsewhere.
  • Multiple publications arising from a single research project should be clearly identified as such and the primary publication should be referenced. Translations and adaptations for different audiences should be clearly identified as such, should acknowledge the original source, and should respect relevant copyright conventions and permission requirements. If in doubt, authors should seek permission from the original publisher before republishing any work.
  • All sources of research funding, including direct and indirect financial support, supply of equipment or materials, and other support should be disclosed.
  • Authors should disclose the role of the research funder(s) or sponsor (if any) in the research design, execution, analysis, interpretation and reporting.
  • Authors should disclose relevant financial and non-financial interests and relationships that might be considered likely to affect the interpretation of their findings or which editors, reviewers or readers might reasonably wish to know.
Appropriate authorship and acknowledgement
  • The authorship of research publications should therefore accurately reflect individuals’ contributions to the work and its reporting.
  • In cases where major contributors are listed as authors while those who made less substantial, or purely technical, contributions to the research or to the publication are listed in an acknowledgement section, the criteria for authorship and acknowledgement should be agreed at the start of the project. Responsibility for the correct attribution of authorship lies with authors themselves working under the guidance of their institution.
  • Researchers should ensure that only those individuals who meet authorship criteria (i.e. made a substantial contribution to the work) are rewarded with authorship and that deserving authors are not omitted.
  • All authors should agree to be listed and should approve the submitted and accepted versions of the publication. Any change to the author list should be approved by all authors including any who have been removed from the list.
  • Authors should not use acknowledgements misleadingly to imply a contribution or endorsement by individuals who have not, in fact, been involved with the work or given an endorsement.


Highslide for Wordpress Plugin