Publication Ethics & Malpractice Statement - CAI Website

Go to content

Main menu:

Publication Ethics & Malpractice Statement

Classics Ireland Journal

Classics Ireland
The Journal of the Classical Association of Ireland
Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

A. Responsibilities of the Editor

  • The editor’s primary responsibility is to determine which of the articles submitted to Classics Ireland will be published. The decision shall be made based on the academic merit of the manuscript received, the policies of the journal’s editorial board, and the recommendations of the reviewers.

  • The editor shall assess manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

  • Information concerning a submitted manuscript should only be revealed to the corresponding author, reviewers, editorial board members, or the publisher (the Classical Association of Ireland) as is required or otherwise appropriate.

  • The editor shall ensure that the reviewers remain anonymous to the authors during the peer-review process and that the authors remain anonymous to the reviewers until the peer-review process is completed.

B. The Peer Review Process

  • All submitted manuscripts are subject to the journal’s double-blind peer review process. The purpose of peer review is to aid the editor in making editorial and publishing decisions and help improve the quality of the manuscripts. The review process normally lasts up to three months.

  • It is the editors’ responsibility to assign two reviewers for each manuscript. If the recommendations of the two reviewers are not the same, the editor may assign additional reviewers at his/her discretion.

  • Reviewers should be knowledgeable about the subject area of the manuscript, but must not be from the author’s own institution or have recent joint publications with any of the authors.

  • All reviewers of a manuscript act independently and they are not aware of each other's identities.

  • Any reviewer who feels unqualified to evaluate the assigned manuscript or is unable to complete the review process in a timely manner should notify the editor and withdrawn from the peer-review process.

  • All manuscripts received for review are to be treated confidentially. Manuscripts must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorised by the editor.

  • Reviews should be objective. Reviewers’ views should be expressed clearly and presented with supporting arguments. Personal criticism is not appropriate.

  • Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been included by the author in their manuscript. Similarly, reviewers should report to the editor any suspicions of plagiarism or similarities between a reviewed manuscript and other work either published or considered for publication elsewhere, of which they have personal knowledge.

  • Both the editor and reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers. If the editor has a conflict of interest, a member of the editorial board will deputise for the editor and fulfil the editor’s responsibilities in the review process, including making a decision on publication.

  • The editor shall ensure reasonable quality control for the reviews. With respect to reviewers whose reviews are convincingly questioned by authors, special attention will be paid to ensure that the reviews are objective and of a high academic standard. Should there be any doubt as to the objectivity of the reviews or quality of the review, additional reviewers will be assigned by the Editor.

C. Responsibilities of Authors

  • Authors should adhere to the following publication requirements: submitted work is their own and entirely original, is not plagiarised, has not been published elsewhere, and the work and words of other authors has been appropriately cited and/or quoted. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

  • An author should not publish manuscripts describing the same research in more than one journal or publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

  • Authors must always give proper acknowledgment of the work of others. Publications that have influenced the nature of the reported work must be cited. Information obtained privately in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties must not be used or reported without written permission from the source.

  • 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 named in an Acknowledgement section.

  • Plagiarism is a violation of academic ethics. Plagiarism includes the following:

  • word for word, or almost word for word copying, or purposely paraphrasing portions of another author’s work without clearly indicating the source or marking the copied fragment (for example, using quotation marks);

  • copying equations, figures, maps, illustrations, images or tables from someone else’s work without properly citing the source and/or without permission from the original author or the copyright holder.

  • Any paper which shows obvious signs of plagiarism will be automatically rejected.

  • All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or substantive conflicts of interest that might be influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed. The editor should be made aware of any potential conflicts of interest at the earliest stage possible. The editor and reviewers should be informed about who has funded research and on the role of the funders in the research.

  • When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to notify the journal editor or publisher promptly and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

In accordance with Elsevier and COPE recommendations.
Approved by Classical Association of Ireland Publications Board
Noted by Classical Association Ireland Council
Noted by Classics Ireland Editorial Board

Back to content | Back to main menu