External peer-review and publishing ethics / Instructions for Authors

We accept submissions in Polish, English and German.
Philosophical texts (papers, discussion notes, critical reviews, reports) of high scholarly quality can be sent to the publishing system on the page: https://wnus.edu.pl or to our e-mail address: egzystencja[at]whus.pl.

Evaluation goes through three stages:

  • The first is editorial selection with regard to compatibility of texts with quarterly’s profile, the competence of our advisors and technical requirements (details below).
  • The second stage is the proper process of double blind peer review. Submitted texts should be prepared for blind review (without references indicating author’s identity).

The form for Referees indicates the criteria of qualification: justification of the theses, exhaustivity of the literature, originality, style correctness. Reviewers are independent experts on the subject matter from external to author academic institution. Neither author nor reviewer is known to each other in the process. Regardless the decision of Reviewer, the Author will get to know the relevant part of the review containing the general assessment of the submitted text.

  • The third stage is final qualifying accepted and corrected texts (to one of prepared volumes).

Submission of a paper is understood as the implicit declaration that submitted text is not currently under consideration by any other journal. After negative decision the author/s is/are released from this convention. We also presume that the submitted text is original result of their research, not published before (translations are exception) and that it does not violate the other persons rights. Such declaration is necessary during publishing licence with the University of Szczecin Press.

To prevent cases of “ghostwriting” and “guest authorship” our editorial office introduced following procedures:

  1. We require authors of many-authored papers to disclose contribution of individual authors to preparation of a publication (with a list of their affiliations) in detail. Main responsibility to disclose full information remains on author submitting manuscript.
  2. We explain hereby that “ghostwriting” and “guest authorship” are indication of scientific dishonesty . “Ghostwriting” is a situation where a person contributes significantly to a publication and is not disclosed as one of the authors or named in the acknowledgments. “Guest authorship” (“honorary authorship”) is a situation where an author’s contribution is insignificant or non existent and he is still listed as author/co-author of a publication.
  3. We declare that all cases will be documented and adequate institutions (after careful checking the evidence) will be informed (employers, scientific societies, etc.).
  4. We invite authors to inform on sources of financing of a publication, for instance,  research grants  („financial disclosure”).
  5. We will document all indications of scientific dishonesty especially of violation of ethical principals followed in science: fabrication of data, falsification of data, plagiarism. We also condemn: not admitting missing data, ignoring outliers, redundant publication, duplicate submissions, inadequate literature research.

Link to COPE

Technical requirements:

We accept papers that don’t exceed  40,000 characters with spaces (in exceptional cases can longer contributions be considered) in format readable in Microsoft Word and 30,000 for discussion notes, 20,000 for critical reviews (they should have their own title).

Papers and discussion notes should be accompanied by:

  1. an  abstract (1/2 of page, 100-150 words),
  2. keywords in Polish and English (5-8),
  3. note about the Author  with address for correspondence
  4. APA Style biography.

We need all of this in one file (the note will be cutted out before blind review). And papers without those elements will not be put in the review process.
The authors of English papers are recommended to use the APA Style.

We require references in brackets (Doniger, 1999, 65) accompanied with appropriate bibliography:
Doniger, W.  (1999) Splitting the Difference. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.


Renata ZieminskaPeer-review and publishing ethics