Publication ethics and publication malpractice

The Bankpedia Review sustains the standards of publication ethics and taking all necessary measures to prevent any publication malpractice.

In respect of the COPE's Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers (for more information see COPE), the publication ethics of the Bankpedia Review includes the most important ethical standards for involved parties including authors, editors and peer reviewers. Any potential or emerging conflicts of interests are to be prevented by the Bankpedia Review and - in case of deviations therefrom - to be reported directly to the editor.


Editor's duties
    •    The editor must maintain the confidentiality of any information related to submitted manuscripts by not disclosing such materials to any non-corresponding authors or reviewers;
    •    The evaluation of the manuscripts must be accomplished in an objective and nondiscriminatory way;
    •    The editor must not use unpublished materials of submitted manuscripts for own research purposes without written consents of the author(s);
    •    The final decision about the selection of the articles to be included is taken by the editor of the Bankpedia Review - if necessary - in combination with the Editorial Committee.


Reviewer's duties
    •    The reviewers' tasks are to support the editor in editorial decision making and the improvement of received manuscripts;
    •    Submitted manuscripts must be treated confidentially (in agreement with the editor), not used for personal benefit and reviewed objectively on the basis of supporting arguments and without personal criticism;
    •    The reviewers must track any uncited sources or materials that have been published before.
Author's duties
    •    The authors should report precisely the originality and significance of their research;
    •    The authors are committed to submit only original work and use citations for any already reported material;
    •    Concurrently submitted manuscript and already published research are unethical and unacceptable;
    •    The manuscripts should include sufficient details and references for replication purposes;
    •    Only significantly contributing authors should be listed in the manuscripts;
    •    The corresponding authors take full responsibility for the content, scientific context and legal aspects of their manuscripts;
    •    Statements and sources with deceptive, dishonest or inaccurate content are unethical and therefore intolerable;
    •    According to official policy statements such as the Declaration of Helsinki (for details see WMA Declaration of Helsinki), research papers involving human and animal subjects have to be approved by a research ethics committee;
    •    Any hazardous procedures, equipment etc. should be clearly indicated by the authors;
    •    The authors should communicate any applicable funding or financial support of the research and the funder's relation to the contribution as well as acknowledge the research of others by citing their work;
    •    The authors are obliged to inform the editor about discovered errors in their already published manuscripts.