Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

Aethiopica follows the guidance provided in COPE’s ‘Core Practices’ and the norms issued by COPE. Aethiopica expects the chief editor, the members of the editorial board and editorial team, authors, and reviewers to follow these codes to reach the highest standards in publication ethics.

Duties and responsibilities of the chief editor

Publication decisions
The chief editor decides in close consultation with the members of the editorial board which of the manuscripts submitted to Aethiopica will be published. In making these decisions, the chief editor and the editorial board are guided by the policies of the journal and constrained by legal requirements, copyright infringement and plagiarism, including self-plagiarism.
The author’s race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, religious belief, citizenship, political philosophy, or social class will not influence the evaluation. The decision to accept or reject a manuscript for publication is based exclusively on its academic merit, its originality and clarity, and the research’s relevance to the scope of Aethiopica.

Peer review process
The chief editor ensures a fair and unbiased double-blind peer review of submitted manuscripts, and that both authors’ and peer reviewers’ identities are protected. He/she ensures that appropriate reviewers are selected.

The chief editor, members of the editorial board and the editorial team must not disclose any information about submitted material to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, and the publisher. The chief editor ensures that all material submitted remains confidential while under review.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest
The chief editor and members of the editorial board and team must not use unpublished information and materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research without the express written consent of the author. Members of the editorial board will recuse themselves from evaluating manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors or institutions connected to the submitted manuscript. The chief editor does require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication.

Procedures for dealing with unethical behaviour
Unethical behaviour may be identified and brought to the attention of the chief editor at any time, by anyone. Whoever informs the editor or publisher of such conduct should provide sufficient information and evidence in order for an investigation to be initiated. The chief editor takes reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published article, in conjunction with the publisher. In cases of suspected misconduct, she/he follows the COPE flowcharts.
The chief editor ensures publishing corrections, clarifications, and apologies whenever needed.

Duties and responsibilities of authors

Publication and submission fee
No fees or charges are required from authors for manuscript processing. Authors pay neither submission nor publication fee beyond eventual copyright fees for the use of third-party copyright material (such as images or tables).

Reporting standards
Authors of articles of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data must be represented accurately in the manuscript. A Research Article should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable. Review Articles and Review Notes should also be accurate and objective.

Originality and plagiarism
Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted and appropriately credited and referenced.
Plagiarism takes many forms, from “passing off” another’s article as the author’s own article, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s article without quotation marks and/or without reference to the source, to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication
In general, authors should not publish articles describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or book. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour. Authors must ensure that the submitted manuscript has not been previously published elsewhere.
The copyright remains with the authors, thus they are free to decide to post a copy of their published article on a personal website or other repositories. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.

Acknowledgement of sources
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. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

Authorship of the paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported research. 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 with the journal must affirm that all appropriate co-authors are included on the manuscript, and that all co-authors have approved the final version of the manuscript and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, honoraria, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible. Readers should be informed about who has funded research and on the role of the funders in the research.

Fundamental errors in published works
An author who discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in her/his own published work, is obligated to promptly notify the chief editor and cooperate with the chief editor to retract or correct the article. If the chief editor or members of the editorial board and editorial team learn from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the article or provide evidence to the chief editor of the correctness of the original article.

Duties and responsibilities of reviewers

Contribution to editorial decisions
Peer reviewing referees assist the chief editor and the members of the editorial board in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the manuscript.

Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its timely review will be impossible should promptly notify the editorial office.

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 chief editor.

Standards of objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should formulate their report clearly and with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors and provide the references. Reviewers should call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published work of which they have personal knowledge. Reviewers must report to the chief editor if they are aware of copyright infringement and plagiarism (including self-plagiarism) on the author’s part.

Disclosure and conflict of interest
Reviewers must not use unpublished information and materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers must not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors or institutions connected to the submitted manuscript.

In case of strong suspicion of fraudulent behaviour concerning Aethiopica’s publications please contact us at the editorial office:
Hiob Ludolf Centre for Ethiopian and Eritrean Studies
Alsterterrasse 1
D-20354 Hamburg
Tel.: +49-40-42838-8380/7730