Publication Ethic & Malpractice Statement

Our Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement are based on the Best Practice Guidelines for Authors, Reviewers, Editor and Publishers and the position statements developed by the COPE's Best Practice Guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics.

All manuscripts submitted to the SWS Scholarly Society journals, proceedings and books are subject to double-blind peer review, with acceptance (without guarantees), based solely on the peer review evaluations of 2 or 3 independent reviewers. We believe that anonymous peer reviewers are the best way to evaluate the manuscripts honestly. Therefore, the SWS Scholarly Society International Scientific Committee excludes direct contact of the reviewers with the authors.
We consider and keep the COPE's Ethical Guidelines for every submitted article during the whole peer review processing.

For all parties involved in the act of publishing (the Author, the Editors, the Reviewers and the Publisher), it is necessary to agree upon standards of expected ethical behaviour. Therefore, the ethics statements for SWS Scholarly Society journals, proceedings, and books are based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

The Author declares that the manuscript is original and in its present form has not been published elsewhere in any form, that it has not been submitted to any journal/proceedings, and that it will not be submitted to any other journal/proceedings if it is accepted for publication in the SWS Scholarly Society journals, proceedings and books.
The Authors are responsible for the research and for the results described in the article. Suppose the article is a joined work of several authors (co-authors). In that case, the Author who submits the article declares that any person named as the Author (co-author) of the Article is aware of the requirements of this agreement and has agreed to be so named.

The Author warrants that the article does not infringe upon any copyright, contains no libellous or otherwise unlawful statements and does not otherwise infringe on the rights of others.
The Author transfers the copyright for this publication/article to the Publisher.
The Author licenses the Publisher the right to distribute the article as a part of SWS Scholarly Society proceedings or journals or books or archives, or any other issue managed by the Society;

The Author has the rights to:

• Distribute non-commercially individual hard copies of the article to the interested parties, with proper citation to the published source.
• Use, after publication, part or all of the article, properly acknowledging the source and the Publisher.

Authors of original research articles should present an accurate account of the work performed and an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the manuscript. It should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review and should be prepared to provide public access to such data and be ready to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Authors should ensure that the submitted work is original and has not been published elsewhere in any language. If the authors have used the work and/or words of others, this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
Applicable copyright laws and conventions should be followed. Copyright material (e.g. tables, figures or extensive quotations) should be reproduced only with appropriate permission and acknowledgement.

Author Participation, Authorship Distribution and Citation Integrity Policy

General Principles
To support broad and credible scholarly participation, editorial independence, balanced authorship distribution, and responsible citation practices, the Publisher monitors authorship and citation patterns across all Conference Proceedings, journals, regular issues, special issues, topical collections, and other publication formats.

Authorship must always reflect a genuine and substantial contribution to the submitted work. The repeated appearance of the same individuals or substantially overlapping author groups may be subject to additional editorial assessment when it results in disproportionate authorship concentration within a publication, issue, volume, or collection.

The purpose of this policy is not to restrict legitimate scientific collaboration, but to prevent excessive concentration of publication output, honorary or nominal authorship, coordinated submission practices, and citation patterns that may compromise editorial independence, scholarly diversity, or publication integrity.

Conference Proceedings
For each Conference Proceedings volume / issue, an individual author may normally serve as first author, presenting author, or corresponding author in one paper.
The same individual may be listed as a contributing co-author in up to two additional papers, provided that the contribution to each paper is genuine, substantial, clearly attributable, and compliant with recognized authorship standards.
As a general rule, no individual author should be listed in more than three papers within the same proceedings volume / issue.

The Scientific Committee may also assess the aggregate concentration of authorship, including the repeated appearance of the same authors or substantially overlapping author groups. Each proceedings volume / issue should represent an appropriately broad and credible scholarly community and should not be disproportionately concentrated around a limited number of individuals, institutions, or closely connected teams.

Exceptions may be considered for multidisciplinary, institutional, international, or large collaborative projects where the substantial contribution of each author can be clearly demonstrated. An author-contribution statement or further supporting information may be required.
Where participation limits are exceeded without sufficient justification, papers may be reassigned to another suitable volume or publication channel, postponed to a subsequent issue, or removed from the proceedings workflow.

Journals, Special Issues and Topical Collections
No automatic numerical limit is applied to an author’s publications across separate regular journal issues solely on the basis of authorship count.
However, the Editorial Board monitors authorship concentration within each regular issue and across the journal’s publication output over time. A regular issue should not be disproportionately dominated by the same authors, substantially overlapping author groups, institutions, editors, or closely connected research teams.

For special issues, topical collections, conference-derived journal issues, and comparable editorial units, the Conference Proceedings participation framework may be applied where necessary. An author should normally serve as first or corresponding author in no more than one paper and may contribute as a co-author to up to two additional papers within the same special issue or collection.

Exceptions require editorial justification and evidence of a genuine and substantial contribution to every paper.
Submissions authored or co-authored by Editors or Guest Editors must be handled independently, without their participation in reviewer selection or editorial decision-making. Contributions from Editors, Guest Editors, Editorial Board Members, their institutions, or closely connected author groups must not dominate an issue or collection.

Citation Integrity
Citation patterns may be assessed both at the level of the individual paper and across an entire proceedings volume, journal issue, special issue, topical collection, or other publication unit.
Legitimate self-citation and citation among collaborating researchers are permitted when the cited works are directly relevant, necessary, and proportionate to the scholarly content.

The following practices are not permitted:

• excessive or irrelevant self-citation;
• coordinated reciprocal citation or citation exchanges;
• citation rings, citation cartels, or systematic citation arrangements;
• repeated citation exchanges within narrowly connected author groups without sufficient scholarly justification;
• unnecessary concentration of references to a particular author, institution, journal, editor, reviewer, or publisher;
• citations included primarily to increase personal, institutional, journal, or other citation indicators;
• coercive citation requests made by editors, reviewers, or other participants in the editorial process.

The Editorial and Review Committees may request an explanation, an author-contribution statement, or revision of the reference list where unusual authorship or citation patterns are identified.
Confirmed authorship or citation manipulation may result in manuscript revision, rejection, removal from the publication workflow, correction, retraction, restrictions on future submissions, or other action under the Publisher’s publication-ethics procedures.

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

Proper acknowledgement of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have influenced the nature of the reported work.

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. Others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
The corresponding Author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Therefore author/s should fill in and send the Publishing Copyright Agreement to the Editorial Board by e-mail or fax.

If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the Author must identify these in the manuscript.

Appropriate approval, licensing or registration should be obtained before the research begins, and details should be provided in the report (e.g. Institutional Review Board, Research Ethics Committee approval, national licensing authorities for the use of animals).
If requested by editors, authors should supply evidence that the reported research received the appropriate approval and was carried out ethically (e.g. copies of approvals, licenses, participant consent forms).
Researchers should not generally publish or share identifiable data collected during research without specific consent from the individual (or their representative).
The appropriate statistical analyses should be determined at the start of the study and a data analysis plan for the pre-specified outcomes should be prepared and followed. Secondary analyses should be distinguished from primary analyses and those set out in the data analysis plan. Researchers should publish all meaningful research results that might contribute to understanding.

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.

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, it is the Author’s obligation to promptly notify the editor or Publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

The increasing use of artificial intelligence (AI) in research, writing, and data analysis necessitates clear ethical guidelines to ensure responsible usage in scientific publishing. Authors who employ AI tools, such as language models, image generators, or data analysis algorithms, must adhere to the following ethical principles:

• Transparency & Disclosure: If AI-generated text, figures, tables, data, or any other content has been used in the manuscript, authors must explicitly acknowledge the use of AI tools and specify their role in the research process. This should be included in the methods or acknowledgments section of the paper.
• Intellectual Accountability: AI tools cannot be credited as authors since they lack the ability to assume responsibility for the integrity of the research. The corresponding human author(s) remain fully accountable for the content, accuracy, and ethical compliance of the manuscript.
• Originality & Integrity: AI-generated content should not be used to fabricate data, falsify results, or generate misleading information. All AI-assisted contributions must comply with the originality standards of the SWS Scholarly Society, and authors must ensure proper verification of AI-generated results before submission.
• AI in Data Processing: If AI or machine learning algorithms are employed for data collection, processing, or interpretation, authors must provide sufficient details about the methodology, validation processes, and potential biases introduced by AI models.
• Avoiding AI-Generated Plagiarism: Authors should ensure that AI-generated text does not incorporate plagiarized content, biased information, or unverifiable references. Any citations suggested by AI must be verified for accuracy.
• Ethical AI Use in Peer Review & Editing: AI tools may assist in grammar checking, formatting, and summarization, but final editorial decisions, peer review processes, and ethical assessments must be conducted by human editors and reviewers.

Any manuscripts received for peer review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be confidential and not used for personal advantage.

Reviews should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments so that authors can use them to improve the paper. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

Reviewers should not consider manuscripts with conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and, through the editorial communication
with the Author, may also assist the Author in improving the manuscript.

An editor at any time evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the nature of the authors or the host institution's race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.

Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that
its timely review will be impossible, should immediately notify the editor so that alternative reviewers
can be contacted.

The editors and any editorial staff must not disclose information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding Author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the Publisher, as appropriate. SWS Scholarly Society operates a web-based submission system, which is run in a way that prevents unauthorized access. In the case of a misconduct investigation, SWS Scholarly Society may disclose material to third parties (e.g., an institutional investigation committee or other editors).

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the Author is unacceptable. Referees
should express their views clearly with appropriate supporting arguments.

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that the authors have not cited. Any
a statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be
accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any
substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published
data of which they have personal knowledge.

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the author's express written consent.

When readers, authors, or editors point out genuine errors in published work that do not render the work invalid, a correction (or erratum) will be published as soon as possible. The paper's online version may be corrected with a modification date and a link to the printed erratum. If the error renders the work or substantial parts of it invalid, the paper should be retracted with an explanation as to the reason for retraction (i.e., honest error).

Suppose serious concerns are raised by readers, reviewers, or others, about the conduct, validity, or reporting of academic work. In that case, SWS Scholarly Society Publishing Team will initially contact the authors and allow them to respond to the concerns and will take this to the institutional level if that response is unsatisfactory. In cases when problems are very serious, SWS Scholarly Society may consider informing readers about these concerns by issuing an ‘expression of concern’, while the investigation is ongoing. Once an investigation is concluded, SWS Scholarly Society will publish a comment explaining the investigation's findings.
SWS Scholarly Society may retract a paper if the Editorial Board is convinced that serious misconduct has happened, even if an institution or national body investigation does not recommend it.

SWS Scholarly Society will respond to all allegations or suspicions of research or publication misconduct raised by readers, reviewers, or other editors. In addition, the journal or proceedings will assess possible plagiarism or duplicate/redundant publication cases. In other cases, SWS Scholarly Society may request an investigation by the institution or other appropriate bodies (after seeking an explanation from the authors first and if that explanation is unsatisfactory).

Retracted papers will be retained online and prominently marked as a retraction in all online versions, including the PDF, for the benefit of future readers.

COPE’s Guidelines will guide the editor for Retracting Articles when considering retracting, issuing expressions of concern about and giving corrections to articles published in SWS Scholarly Society journals, proceedings and books. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the Author's express written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be confidential and not used for personal advantage.

The editors are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint, or other commercial revenue has no
impact or influence on editorial decisions and should provide a fair and appropriate peer review process.
They should refrain from considering 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 papers. Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expressing concern.

The editors are responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal/proceedings should be published. Moreover, he/she is accountable for everything published in the journal/proceedings. In making these decisions, the editor may be guided by the editorial board's policies and by legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers when making publication decisions. The editor should maintain the integrity of the academic record, preclude business needs from compromising intellectual and ethical standards, and always be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies when needed.

The editor should evaluate manuscripts for intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the Author (s). The editor will not disclose any information about a manuscript under consideration to anyone other than the author(s), reviewers and potential reviewers, and in some instances, the editorial board members, as appropriate.

The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding Author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the Publisher, as appropriate.

Editors should guard the integrity of the published record by issuing corrections and retractions when needed and pursuing suspected or alleged research and publication misconduct. Editors should
pursue reviewer and editorial misconduct. An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.

SWS Scholarly Society journals, conference proceedings, monographs, books are permanently archived. Depending on the edition's type, the backup process follows CLOCKSS, Global LOCKSS, Portico standards or own file servers, mirrored in a web-based cloud service, and independent of electricity and internet connection problems (https://ssalibrary.at or https://epslibrary.at)

In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism the Publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum or, in the most severe cases, the complete retraction of the affected work.

The publisher is dedicated to supporting the efforts of reviewers, editors, and authors' academic contributions to their work. It is the publisher's responsibility to ensure that all stages in the publishing system operate smoothly and that ethical rules are applied to assist editors, authors and reviewers in fulfilling their ethical obligations. Dealing with unethical posting behaviour In cases of suspected or duly proven scientific misconduct, publication fraud or outright plagiarism, the publisher, together with the editorial team, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend this report. This includes immediate publication of the error, explanatory text or, in the most serious case, withdrawal of the affected work. The publisher and editors must take adequate steps to detect and prevent the publication of articles in violation of the research activity. Under no circumstances does the publisher encourage or knowingly allow such infringement.

The publisher is committed to permanent online availability and preservation over time of the scientific reports in journals/conference proceedings/monographs or books. Depending on the edition's type, the backup process follows CLOCKSS, Global LOCKSS, Portico standards or provides accessibility through its own online platform and maintenance of its own digital archive - https://ssalibrary.at or https://epslibrary.at.

The SWS Scholarly Society, as a global academic publisher, recognizes the pivotal role of research in addressing the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Our Earth & Planetary Sciences (EPS), Social Sciences (SS), and Arts & Humanities (AH) publications actively contribute to scientific advancements, ethical policymaking, and cultural awareness—driving solutions for a sustainable future.

The SWS Scholarly Society upholds the principles of sustainability, responsible publishing, and academic integrity by ensuring that research across disciplines contributes to the following SDGs:

• Ensuring open academic discourse on SDG-driven research.
• Encouraging interdisciplinary solutions to global sustainability challenges.
• Fostering transparent peer review to maintain research integrity.
• Minimizing environmental impact through digital publishing and responsible conference organization.

You can write to the Editorial board here: Contact the SWS team