Editorial Policy and Publication Ethics

Ethics guidelines of the Editorial Board of journal "Humanitas"

 General provisions

Editorial Policy of the journal is based on the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics, as well as the DORA principles.

The editorial board considers the monitoring of ethics of the manuscripts as one of the aspects of its activities and the peer-review process.

Editors don’t approve the materials which contain insulting statements, manifestations of aggression or any discrimination, or incite ethnic and racial hatred, violate international legal norms and current legislation of Ukraine.

Editors are not responsible for opinions, judgments, results and conclusions made by the authors of articles and published in the journal. They do not represent the point of view of the editorial board.

Editors are not liable to the authors and/or third parties and organizations for possible damage caused by the publication of the article.

The authors are responsible for the originality or any unfair use of the intellectual property of other authors, as well as for the reliability of information, the accuracy of names, surnames, etc.

Editors reserve the right to review the above ethical principles to amend them.

Ethical guidelines for editors

▶ editors take responsibility for everything they publish and thus, all submitted materials are subject to careful selection and peer review. Editors reserve the right to reject an article or send back for improving;

▶ editors should make fair and unbiased decisions independent from commercial consideration and ensure a fair and appropriate peer review process within a reasonable time;

▶ editors are entitled to reject a manuscript without peer-reviewing if it doesn’t meet the editorial policy, ethics and requirements for manuscripts;

▶ editors shall not provide information related to the content of a manuscript under consideration to other persons, except ones involved in the professional evaluation of this manuscript;

▶ editors are authorized to withdraw the electronic version of the article published in the printed version of the journal, if someone’s rights or generally accepted rules of scientific ethics are violated. The editors inform the author who provided the article and the organization where the work was performed about the fact of withdrawal of the article. Editors also publish a notice of the fact of withdrawal of the article in the next issue of the journal;

▶ editors allow distributing any articles or extracts from the journal in electronic social networks, but reference to the original source is mandatory. The third parties or organizations are prohibited to publish and / or distribute the journal materials in paper form and data storage devices.

Ethical guidelines for authors

▶ the research being reported should have been conducted in an ethical and responsible manner and should comply with all relevant legislation. Authors should mention dangerous manifestations and risks associated with the research;

▶ researchers should present their results clearly, honestly, and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation.

▶ researchers should adhere to publication requirements that submitted work is original, is not plagiarised, and has not been published elsewhere;

▶ a manuscript can involve scientifically grounded criticism of a paper of another researcher. The personal comments are not regarded as relevant;

▶ funding sources and relevant conflicts of interest should be disclosed. Authors should guarantee a lack of the contractual relations or
property considerations, which could influence the publication of information contained in a manuscript;

▶ authors should indicate the sources of cited information, which should be properly acknowledged and referenced.

Ethical guidelines for peer-reviews

▶ if an appointed peer-reviewer is not confident that his qualification meets the level of research, he/she should give the manuscript back immediately;

▶ a reviewer should be impartial when evaluating a manuscript, its experimental and theoretical parts, interpretation and statement, as well as take into account the correspondence of the research compliance with the high scientific and literature standards. The reviewer should respect the intellectual independence of authors.

▶ a reviewer should take into account a possibility of the conflict of interests if a particular manuscript closely relates to the reviewer’s current or published paper. If there are doubts, the reviewer should refuse to review the manuscripts referring to the conflict of interests;

▶ a reviewer should assess a manuscript if he/she has personal or professional relations and if such relations can influence the impartiality;

▶ a reviewer shouldn’t show a manuscript under review others or discuss it with colleagues, only if the reviewer needs professional advice;

▶ reviewers should adequately explain and justify their judgments so that editors and authors can understand the reasons their comments are based on;

▶ a reviewer should indicate any cases of a lack of citations of the papers of other scholars, any significant similarity between the relevant manuscript and any published article or any manuscript simultaneously submitted to another journal;

▶ a reviewer should provide a review without undue delay;

▶ reviewers should not use or disclose unpublished information, arguments, or interpretations contained in the manuscript without the consent of the author.

 

Adherence to the Principles of Responsible Research Assessment (DORA)

The Editorial Board of the journal supports the principles of the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA), which aim to improve practices for evaluating research outputs.

The journal recognizes that research results should be assessed primarily on the basis of their scientific content, methodological quality, originality, and significance, rather than on journal-level metrics or other aggregated bibliometric indicators.

In its editorial practice, the journal follows these approaches:

▶ Manuscripts are evaluated based on scientific quality, sound methodology, originality, and relevance of the research, regardless of the bibliometric indicators of the authors or the journals in which they have previously published.

▶ The Editorial Board does not use the journal impact factor or other journal-based metrics as the primary criterion for evaluating individual research articles.

▶ During the editorial and peer-review process, the journal recognizes the diversity of research outputs, including theoretical developments, methodological approaches, empirical studies, and other forms of scholarly contribution.

▶ The journal encourages research transparency, proper citation of sources, and responsible use of research metrics.

The Editorial Board encourages authors, reviewers, and members of the editorial council to adhere to the principles of responsible research assessment and to contribute to the development of an ethical and transparent scholarly communication environment.

 

Retraction Policy

The Editorial Board adheres to the principles of academic integrity, publication ethics, and international standards of scholarly communication, in particular the recommendations of COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics). Retraction of an article is considered an exceptional measure applied to ensure the reliability of the scholarly record and to inform readers about substantial violations that affect the results or conclusions of the research.

Grounds for retraction may include confirmed cases of plagiarism or self-plagiarism, fabrication or falsification of data, significant errors that render the findings unreliable, duplicate publication, copyright infringement, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or other serious violations of the journal’s editorial policies and ethical standards. The procedure may be initiated by authors, members of the editorial board, reviewers, readers, or the institutions with which the authors are affiliated. 

Upon receiving such information, the Editorial Board conducts a preliminary assessment and, where necessary, carries out an internal investigation involving members of the editorial board or independent experts. The authors of the article are informed of the concerns raised and are given the opportunity to provide explanations. Following the review, the Editorial Board may decide that no action is required, issue a correction, publish an expression of concern, or retract the article.

If a decision to retract is made, the journal publishes an official retraction notice indicating the reasons for the retraction and the date of the decision. The retracted article is not removed from the journal’s electronic archive; however, it is clearly marked as retracted to ensure transparency and preserve the integrity of the scholarly record. All decisions are made in accordance with the principles of fairness, confidentiality, and respect for the rights of all parties involved in the publication process.

 

Statement on the Use of Generative AI (GenAI)

The journal Humanitas recognizes the growing role of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools, such as ChatGPT, Bard, or Claude, in academic research and scholarly writing. We support the responsible and transparent use of such tools in accordance with international ethical standards and publishing guidelines.

GenAI tools cannot be listed as authors. Only human researchers can take responsibility for the integrity, originality, and accuracy of a submitted manuscript. Authors are fully accountable for all content, including any material generated with the help of AI tools.

GenAI may be used to support language editing, improve clarity, or assist in literature reviews. However, its use must not replace critical thinking, data interpretation, or scientific reasoning, which are the foundations of scholarly research.

If GenAI tools were used at any stage of manuscript preparation, authors must explicitly disclose this in the “Acknowledgments” or a dedicated section of the manuscript. A sample disclosure:

"Portions of this manuscript were supported by the use of generative AI tools to assist with language editing and text refinement. All content was reviewed and verified by the authors."

Authors must not use GenAI to generate, fabricate, or alter data, references, or findings. Submissions found to rely on AI-generated data without verification or transparency will be rejected or retracted.

The editorial board follows COPE’s guidance on AI use in research publishing and reserves the right to request original data or explanations from authors concerning their use of GenAI. Misuse of AI tools will be treated as a potential breach of research ethics.

 

Policy on Ethical Approval of Research Involving Human Participants

The academic journal adheres to the requirements of the current legislation of Ukraine and international ethical standards governing the conduct of research involving human participants, the use of personal or confidential data, biological materials, or research involving animals.

If a study submitted for publication falls under the scope of Ukrainian legislation on bioethics, personal data protection, or other relevant regulatory acts, authors are required to provide confirmation of approval obtained from an authorized body, in particular an ethics (bioethics) committee or another competent authority of the institution.

For research involving human participants, authors must ensure compliance with the principles of voluntary informed consent, confidentiality, anonymity, and the prevention of harm to research participants. In cases involving the collection and processing of personal data, compliance with the legislation of Ukraine on personal data protection must be ensured.

The Editorial Board reserves the right to request additional documents from authors confirming compliance with ethical standards and legal requirements, as well as to reject manuscripts that fail to meet these standards.