• We are available for your help 24/7
  • Email: info@isindexing.com, submission@isindexing.com

Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Ethics and Malpractice Statement


The editor-in-chief of the magazine “Historical Views”, in consultation with the editorial board, makes the final decision on which manuscripts will be published. The editor-in-chief is guided by the opinion of the reviewers, the views of editorial staff and the editorial policy of the journalist, taking into account defamation laws, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor-in-chief and editorial staff are required to report any perceived violations of ethical standards.

The Editor-in-Chief reserves the discretion to evaluate and not publish the received manuscripts if he or she finds that they do not meet the prescribed substantive and formal criteria.

In regular circumstances, the editor and the editorial board shall inform the author of his acceptance of the text as soon as possible after the date of receipt of the manuscript.

The editor-in-chief must not have any conflict of interest regarding the manuscripts they are considering. If such a conflict of interest exists, the editorial board decides the selection of the reviewers and the fate of the manuscript. If there is a conflict of interest with one or more editorial staff, those members are excluded from the process of selecting reviewers and deciding on the manuscript. The editor-in-chief and the editorial staff are obliged to timely report a conflict of interest.

The editor-in-chief and the editorial staff are required to make a judgment on the manuscript on the basis of its contents, without racial, gender / gender, religious, ethnic or political prejudice.

The editor-in-chief and editorial staff must not use unpublished material from submitted manuscripts for their research without the express written permission of the author, and the information and ideas presented in the submitted manuscripts must be kept confidential and not be used for personal gain.

The editor-in-chief and editorial staff are required to take all reasonable steps to ensure that the identity of the reviewers remains unknown to the authors before, during and after the review process and that the identity of the authors remains unknown to the reviewers until the completion of the review process.


The authors guarantee that the manuscript represents their original contribution, that it has not been published before, and that it is not considered for publication elsewhere. Simultaneously submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals is a violation of ethical standards. Such manuscript is immediately excluded from further consideration.

The authors also warrant that, upon publication in the Historical Views, the manuscript will not be published in any other language without the consent of the editor-in-chief, editor or publisher.

In case the submitted manuscript is the result of a scientific research project or if, in the previous version, it was presented at a conference in the form of an oral announcement (under the same or similar title), more detailed information about the project, conference and the like are given in the footnote at the very beginning of the text. . A work that has already been published in a journal cannot be reprinted in the journal “Historical Views”, unless it is a translation, adaptation and modification of the conducted research, etc., which must be clearly indicated.

Authors are required to adhere to ethical standards related to scientific research. The authors also guarantee that the manuscript does not contain unjustified or unlawful claims and does not violate the rights of others. The publisher, the editorial board and the editor-in-chief will not be held responsible for any claims for damages.

Authors of peer-reviewed papers must respond to any request by the journal’s editorial board.

Content of the paper

The paper should contain sufficient details and references to allow reviewers and subsequently readers to verify the claims made therein. Deliberately making incorrect claims is a violation of ethical standards.

The authors bear all responsibility for the contents of the submitted manuscripts and are obliged, if necessary, to obtain the consent of all persons or institutions that have directly participated in the research presented in the manuscript, prior to their publication. Authors are required to indicate who funded their research, if this is the case.

Authors who wish to include illustrations, tables, or other material already published elsewhere must obtain the consent of the copyright holders. Material for which no such evidence has been provided will be considered the original work of the author. If, after the publication of the work, there is any objection from the copyright holders that the material was published without their consent, the magazine “Historical Views” will publish a correction or withdraw the work and clearly state that the mistake was caused by the author’s fault.


Authors are required to cite only those persons who have significantly contributed to the content of the manuscript, ie they are obliged to list all persons who have significantly contributed to the content of the manuscript as authors. If other non-authors were involved in important aspects of the research project and the preparation of the manuscript, their contribution should be mentioned in a note or thank you note.

Citing sources

Authors are required to correctly cite sources that have substantially influenced the content of the research and manuscript. Authors should not cite archival and other sources they did not really use, nor cite publications that they did not really read. Information obtained in private conversation or in correspondence with third parties should not be used without the express written permission of the source.


Plagiarizing, or taking on, someone else’s ideas, words, or other forms of creative expression and presenting them as one’s own is a gross violation of scientific and publishing ethics. Plagiarism may include copyright infringement, which is punishable by law.

Plagiarism includes the following:

literally or almost literally downloading or deliberately paraphrasing (in order to conceal plagiarism) portions of texts by other authors without clearly indicating the source or marking the copied fragments (for example, by using quotation marks);
    copying pictures or tables from other people’s works without properly citing the source and / or without the permission of the author or copyright holder

Manuscripts with clear indications of plagiarism will be automatically rejected. This decision will be published and will be taken into account in the event that the same author submits new work.

If it is determined that the work published in the journal is plagiarized, it will be withdrawn in accordance with the procedure described in Withdrawal of previously published works.
Conflict of interests

Authors are required to indicate in the paper financial or any other conflicts of interest that could affect the results and interpretations presented.

Errors in published works

In the event that authors find an important error in their work after its publication, they are obliged to immediately notify the editor or publisher thereof and cooperate with them in order to withdraw or correct the work.

By submitting the manuscript to the editorial staff of “Historical Views”, the authors undertake to comply with these obligations.


Reviewers are obliged to provide the editor with an expert evaluation of the scientific value of the manuscript in a professional, objective, argumentative, precise, impartial manner and as soon as possible.

Reviewers evaluate the papers in relation to the compliance of the topic of work with the profile of the journal, the relevance of the research area and the methods used, the originality and scientific relevance of the data presented in the manuscript, the style of scientific presentation and the equipment of the text with a scientific apparatus.

A reviewer who has reasonable doubt or knowledge of a breach of ethical standards by the author is obliged to notify the editor. The reviewer should identify important published works not cited by the authors, as well as relevant archival and other source material that the authors did not use. He should also alert the editor to any significant similarities and coincidences between the manuscript under review and any other published work or manuscript under review in another journal, if he has personal knowledge of it. If he / she has the knowledge that he / she is reviewing the same manuscript in several journals at the same time, the reviewer is obliged to inform the editor.

The reviewer must not be in conflict of interest with the authors or the funder of the research. If there is a conflict of interest, the reviewer is obliged to notify the editor. A reviewer who considers himself / herself incompetent for the topic or area of the manuscript is required to notify the editor.

The review must be objective. Personal criticism is unacceptable. Reviewers must express their views clearly and reasonably.

Manuscripts sent to the reviewer are considered confidential documents. Reviewers may not use unpublished material from submitted manuscripts for their research without the express written permission of the author, and the information and ideas presented in the submitted manuscripts must be kept confidential and must not be used for personal gain.


Papers received in the editorial board of the Historical Views magazine, which, in the opinion of the editor-in-chief, meet the basic requirements in terms of content and form, are subject to an anonymous review by two external reviewers. The purpose of the review is to assist the editor in deciding whether the work should be accepted or rejected and to improve the quality of the manuscript through the process of communication with the authors.

The selection of reviewers is at the discretion of the editor. Reviewers must have relevant knowledge of the area of the manuscript and should not be from the same institution as the author, nor may they be authors who have recently published publications together (as co-authors) with any of the authors of submitted papers. Reviewers do not receive fees.

The editor-in-chief sends to the selected reviewers the text of the paper without the name and affiliation of the author and other information that could reveal the identity of the author and the review form adopted by the editorial board of the magazine “Historical Views“. The form consists of a series of questions that the reviewer should answer and point out some elements that influence the acceptance or refusal of the publication of the paper. Based on the form, the reviewer gives an opinion on whether the work should be published without changes, should be published with changes or not should be published. Likewise, the reviewer makes a proposal for categorizing the work (Original scientific paper, review article, preliminary communication and expert paper). In a separate section of the form, reviewers have the space to make specific comments, suggestions and suggestions, which, unsigned, the editor can forward to the authors. The identity of the author remains unknown to the reviewers and the identity of the reviewers to the authors before, during and after the review process.

Throughout the process, the reviewers act independently of one another. The reviewers are not aware of the identity of the other reviewers. If the reviews of the reviewers are not the same (accept / reject), the editor-in-chief may seek the opinion of other reviewers or make the decision without further review.

During the review process, the editor may require authors to provide additional information (including primary information), if required to make a judgment about the scientific contribution of the manuscript. The editor and reviewers must keep such information confidential and may not use it for personal gain.

The editorial staff is obliged to provide quality control of the review. In the event that authors have serious and well-founded objections to the review, the editorial board will check that the review is objective and meets academic standards. If there is any doubt about the objectivity or quality of the review, the editor will seek the opinion of other reviewers.


Any individual or institution may, at any time, report to the editor and / or editorial board about the violation of ethical standards and other irregularities and provide the necessary information / evidence.
Verification of allegations and evidence presented

The editor-in-chief, in agreement with the editorial board, will decide on the initiation of proceedings aimed at verifying the allegations and evidence presented.
During the proceedings, all evidence presented will be considered confidential material and will be presented only to those persons directly involved in the proceedings.
Persons suspected of violating ethical standards will be given the opportunity to respond to the allegations against them.
If irregularities are found to be true, it will be assessed whether they should be characterized if it is a minor offense or a gross violation of ethical standards.

Minor offense

Situations characterized as minor offenses will be dealt with in direct communication with the perpetrators, without the involvement of third parties, for example:

informing the authors / reviewers that there has been a minor offense resulting from misunderstanding or misapplication of academic standards;
    a letter of warning to the author / reviewer who has committed a minor offense.

Gross violation of ethical standards

Decisions regarding gross violation of ethical standards are made by the Editor-in-Chief in collaboration with the editorial board and, if necessary, by a small group of scholars. The measures to be taken may be as follows (and may be applied individually or simultaneously):

publication of a statement or editorial describing a case of breach of ethical standards;
sending formal notice to the executives or employers of the author / reviewer;
withdrawal of published work in accordance with the procedure described in the withdrawal of previously published works;
authors will be forbidden to submit papers to the journal for a certain period;
familiarizing the relevant professional organizations or competent authorities with the case so that they can take appropriate action.

The Editorial Board of the Journal is guided by the guidelines and recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) when resolving disputable situations: http://publicationethics.org/resources/.


In case of violation of the rights of publishers, copyright holders or authors, violation of professional codes of ethics, ie. in the case of submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals at the same time, false claims of authorship, plagiarism, manipulation of data for fraudulent purposes, as well as in all other cases of gross violation of ethical standards, the published work must be withdrawn. In some cases, previously published work may also be withdrawn to correct any errors subsequently identified.


The Historical Views journal allows authors to upload a final, published version of a manuscript in PDF format to an institutional repository and / or non-commercial database, or publish it on personal websites (including non-social media profiles for scientists, such as ResearchGate, Academia.edu etc.) and / or on the website of the institution where they are employed, in accordance with the Creative Commons – Attribution – NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International  (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) licence, at any time after the original publication in the journal. Basic bibliographic information on the article published in the journal (author (s), title, journal title, year, number, pagination) must be provided, and the URL of the journal must be provided.


When a manuscript is accepted for publication, authors transfer the copyright to the publisher. In the event that the manuscript is not accepted for publication in the journal, the authors reserve all rights.

The following non-exclusive rights to the manuscript, including supplementary materials, and any parts, abstracts, or elements of the manuscript are transferred to the publisher:

 the right to reproduce and distribute the manuscript in hard copy, including on-demand printing;
the right to print proofs, reprints and special edition manuscripts;
the right to translate the manuscript into other languages;
the right to reproduce the manuscript using photomechanical or similar means, including but not limited to photocopying, and the right to distribute these copies;
the right to reproduce and distribute the manuscript electronically or optically using all media or storage media, especially in machine readable / digitized form on data media such as hard disk, CD-ROM, DVD, Blu-ray Disc (BD), mini disk, data tapes, and the right to reproduce and distribute the manuscript from those data carriers;
– the right to keep the manuscript in databases, including online databases, and the right to transmit manuscripts in all technical systems and modes;
the right to make the manuscript available to the public or closed user groups on the basis of individual requests for use on a monitor or other readers (including e-book readers), and in hard copy for users, either via the Internet, online services, or through internal or external networks.

The authors reserve the right to translate the article into another language, to use it in publications that are a compilation of their work, to use it in a doctoral dissertation or monograph provided that the new work is a derivative of an article published in the journal “Historically views ”. Basic bibliographic data of the original article published in the journal (author (s), title, journal title, year, number, pagination) must be provided, and the URL of the journal must be provided.


The views expressed in published papers do not express the views of editors and editorial staff. The authors take legal and moral responsibility for the ideas presented in their works. The publisher will not be held responsible for any claims for damages.