Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Following are the standards for all parties involved in the publishing procedures in the bilingual journal Intercultural Relations: the author, the journal editor and editorial board, the peer reviewers and the publisher.

All article proposals submitted for publication in Intercultural Relations are peer reviewed for authenticity, scientific added value, and ethical standards.


The editors with the assistance of the editorial board are in charge of monitoring the ethical standards of publications and take appropriate measures against any publication malpractices. Submitted manuscripts are evaluated for their intellectual content without any bias whatsoever as regards to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, citizenship, or political ideology of the authors.

Publication decisions. The editor is responsible for deciding which of the submitted articles should or should not be published. The decision to accept or reject a paper for publication is based on its possible impact on the relevant discipline (social sciences and humanities), originality, clarity, and its relevance to the scope of the journal.

Confidentiality. The editor and the members of the editorial board ensure that all materials submitted to the journal remain confidential whilst under review. No information concerning submitted manuscripts is disclosed to unauthorized individuals. Information concerning submitted manuscripts may be only disclosed to the author or authors, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher.

Disclosure and conflict of interest. Unpublished materials disclosed in the submitted manuscript must not be used by the editor and the editorial board in their own research without written consent of the authors. Editors ensure that potential business needs do not harm intellectual properties of the author(s) and ethical standards applied by the journal.

Maintaining the integrity of the academic record. The editors monitor and guard the integrity of the published academic record by issuing corrections and retractions when needed and pursuing suspected or alleged research and publication misconduct. Fraudulent data and plagiarism are strongly forbidden. All papers submitted for the journal are investigated to exclude any potential risk of data and research abuse.

Any potential corrections, clarifications and retractions are possible after being investigated by the editorial board.

Retractions of the articles. The editors consider to retract submitted paper in the following cases:
- there is clear evidence that the findings of the paper are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g. data fabrication) or honest error (e.g. miscalculation or experimental error),
- the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper cross-referencing, permission or - justification (cases of redundant publication),
- there is a well-grounded evidence of plagiarism or reports of unethical research   practices.

The retraction decision is linked to the article in issue including the title, the author(s), the affiliation in the retraction heading. The decision is clearly identified by the editor in charge and the reviewers. Retraction notices are accompanied by the editor?s official statement on the reason for retraction to distinguish honest error from misconduct.


Reporting standards. Authors of reports of original papers are obliged to deliver an accurate account of the work followed by an objective discussion of its scientific significance. The paper needs to contain adequate details and references to permit others to replicate the work. The fabrication of results and making of fraudulent or inaccurate statements is considered unethical and is the direct cause of rejection or retraction of a manuscript or a published article.

Originality and plagiarism. Authors submitting their papers to the journal ensure delivering a fully and entirely original works. Any references to other works should be clearly indicated and if needed properly quoted keeping internationally acknowledged standards.

Data access retention.  In doubtful cases, the authors may be asked to provide the raw data for editorial review. The data should be prepared in a manner allowing public access after publication of the paper.

Multiple or concurrent publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

Authorship of the manuscript. Authorship is limited to authors who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the paper. Researchers who have made contributions should be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the paper. All co-authors have to approve the final version of the paper and have to agree to its submission for publication. This should be confirmed in writing signed by the co-author(s).

Acknowledgement of sources. A proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. The authors are obliged to cite publications that have been significant in the process of preparing reported work.

Fundamental errors in published works. In case the author identifies inaccuracy in their published work, it is the author?s obligation to notify the journal editor and publisher immediately. Intensive and scrupulous cooperation of the author and  the editor is required to retract or correct the paper.



Contribution to editorial decisions. Peer reviews assist the editor in making editorial decisions and helps the authors to improve the manuscript in line with the reviews and the general scope of the journal.

Promptitude: Reviewers are selected in accordance with their specialization and are obliged to report to the editor without delay any obstacles hampering robust and objective review of assigned paper.  

Confidentiality. All manuscripts received for review are regarded as confidential documents. The papers are discussed ONLY with the editorial board, the editor in charge and the reviewing experts.

Standards of objectivity. All reviews are conducted keeping high standards as regards objectivity and scientific scrutiny. Any personal criticism of the author is strongly prohibited. Reviewing experts are obliged to deliver an objective assessment of the paper justified by scientifically solid argumentation.

Acknowledgement of sources. Any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper should be reported by the reviewer(s)to the editor.

Disclosure and conflict of interest. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers must not evaluate manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relations with any of the authors, companies, or institutions involved in writing a paper.