Manuscript review procedure

1. Upon receipt of a manuscript, the Editorial Board (a member of the Editorial Board and the Editor-in-Chief of "Poradnik Językowy") conducts a preliminary assessment to determine whether the manuscript falls within the scope of the journal.

2. The article is reviewed by two external reviewers. The anonymity of both authors and external reviewers is maintained through a double-blind peer-review process.

3. In accordance with the recommendations of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education, reviewers are required to declare that there is no conflict of interest between themselves and the author.

4. Reviews are submitted in writing using a review form. Each review concludes with a clear recommendation either to accept the manuscript for publication (possibly subject to revisions deemed necessary by the reviewer) or to reject it. Reviewers may also provide a descriptive justification for their recommendation.

5. The Editorial Board returns manuscripts that require corrections or additions, or that do not comply with the journal’s editorial guidelines, to the authors for revision or completion.

6. If one review is negative and the other positive, the manuscript is sent to a third reviewer.

7. The Editorial Board decides whether to accept or reject a manuscript for publication on the basis of the peer reviews.

8. Original articles that fall within the scope of "Poradnik Językowy" and have received two positive reviews confirming an appropriate substantive, methodological, linguistic, and stylistic standard are accepted for publication.

9. The names of reviewers who have collaborated with the journal during a given year are published on the journal’s website and/or in Issue 10.

10. Authors are not charged any fees for submitting or publishing their work in "Poradnik Językowy".

Ethical standards

The Editorial Board of "Poradnik Językowy" follows the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the principles set out in the Code of Ethics for Researchers of the Polish Academy of Sciences. All ethical issues related to publication are handled in accordance with these guidelines.

Links:

COPE: https://publicationethics.org/guidance

PAN: https://publikacje.pan.pl/dlibra/flipbook/136827

Authors

1. Authors must list all individuals who contributed to the preparation of the article. Authorship is based on: a significant contribution to the formulation of the research idea, the development of the concept, and the design of the study; a substantial contribution to data collection, analysis, and interpretation of the results; and a substantial contribution to drafting and writing the article or critically revising it for important intellectual content.

2. When providing authors’ affiliations, it is recommended that the nature of each author’s contribution also be specified. The actual contributions of co-authors to the publication should be disclosed (including their affiliations and information on who conceived the ideas, assumptions, methods, etc. used in preparing the publication). Responsibility for providing this information rests with the person submitting the manuscript to the editorial office.

3. The order in which authors’ surnames are listed should follow the convention of the relevant academic discipline (linguistics, Polish studies) and should be agreed upon by all co-authors.

4. Financial support and any other assistance received in conducting the research that led to the article should be appropriately acknowledged.

5. Authors are asked to disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest that may affect the conduct of the research or the presentation of its results, or that could reasonably be perceived as having such an effect.

6. The republication of substantial portions of a paper may be permitted only with the consent of its editors. The reprint must include a reference to the paper’s original publication.

7. Authors are required to submit a statement confirming the originality of their texts.

8. When conducting research, authors are required to adhere to ethical principles. If a study involves human participants, authors should ensure that participants’ rights are respected, including the protection of privacy and personal data, and should obtain participants’ consent where required. If the nature of the research requires approval from an ethics committee, information concerning such approval should be included in the article.

Reviewers

1. Reviewers should not agree to evaluate scholarly work that falls outside their areas of academic experience and expertise.

2. Reviewers participating in the evaluation of a publication should decline to take part in the review process whenever there is a conflict of interest between themselves and the author whose work is being reviewed.

3. Reviews and opinions, whether positive or negative, should be thorough, accurate, and objective, and all assessments should be well founded.

4. Reviewers of scholarly publications should keep their opinions confidential until the publications have been published.

5. Neither reviewers nor editors of scholarly works may use data or concepts contained in manuscripts submitted to them prior to publication without the author’s consent.

Editorial Board and Publisher

1. Members of the Editorial Board of Poradnik Językowy are bound by confidentiality with regard to both the content of submitted and unpublished articles and information concerning the peer-review process. Such information is made available only to authors and reviewers.

2. Members of the Editorial Board of "Poradnik Językowy" will not use information contained in unpublished articles without the authors’ consent.

3. Members of the Editorial Board are required to disclose any actual or potential conflict of interest related to a manuscript under consideration. If such a conflict arises, the Board member concerned will not participate in the preliminary assessment of the manuscript, the selection of reviewers, the peer-review process, or the decision to accept or reject the manuscript.

4. A conflict of interest is defined, in particular, as any personal, professional, or financial relationship that could influence the impartiality of an editorial decision or could reasonably be perceived as doing so.

5. Articles authored or co-authored by members of the Editorial Board are subject to the standard peer-review process, which is overseen by another member of the Board who has no conflict of interest with the author(s). An author who is a member of the Editorial Board does not participate in the selection of reviewers, does not have access to information that would enable the reviewers to be identified, and does not participate in decisions concerning the publication of their own manuscript. If a conflict of interest involves the Editor-in-Chief, responsibility for the review process is entrusted to another member of the Editorial Board who has no conflict of interest.

6. The Editorial Board publishes corrections and comments on published articles, as well as contributions to debates, in a dedicated section of the journal.

7. Texts are available under a CC BY 4.0 licence.

Procedure in cases of suspected breaches of publication ethics

1. The Editorial Board investigates reports of possible breaches of publication ethics both before and after publication. This applies in particular to suspected plagiarism or self-plagiarism, fabrication or falsification of data, improper attribution of authorship, manipulation of the peer-review process, undisclosed conflicts of interest, and other forms of research misconduct.

2. The investigation is conducted confidentially and in accordance with COPE guidelines. The person who is the subject of the report is given an opportunity to provide an explanation.

3. Depending on the nature and severity of the identified violation, the Editorial Board may reject the manuscript or publish a correction, an expression of concern, or a retraction notice; in justified cases, it may contact the institution with which the author is affiliated or another appropriate body.

Corrections, expressions of concern and retractions

1. The Editorial Board safeguards the integrity of published scholarly work. If errors are discovered after publication that do not undermine the credibility of the publication’s fundamental findings or conclusions, the Editorial Board publishes a correction or amendment.

2. If serious doubts arise regarding the credibility or accuracy of a publication and cannot yet be definitively resolved, the Editorial Board may publish an expression of concern regarding the publication.

3. A publication may be retracted if there are clear grounds for concluding that its results or conclusions are unreliable as a result of a serious error or research misconduct, particularly in cases of plagiarism, unauthorised republication, a serious breach of research ethics, or a significant violation of the peer-review or publication process.

4. The decision to retract a publication is made by the Editorial Board following an appropriate investigation conducted in accordance with current COPE guidelines.