Publication policy

The journal Nova škola adheres to the highest standards of academic integrity and publishing ethics, in accordance with the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), and internationally recognized best practices in scholarly publishing.

The journal is committed to transparency, ethical responsibility, and the dissemination of high-quality scientific knowledge.

1. Publication Ethics (COPE-Aligned)

1.1. Responsibilities of Authors

Authors are required to:

  • submit original work that has not been previously published or submitted elsewhere
  • ensure the accuracy and integrity of data and results
  • properly cite all sources and references
  • avoid all forms of plagiarism and unethical conduct
  • disclose all sources of funding
  • declare any potential conflicts of interest
  • participate actively in the peer review process and respond to reviewers’ comments

Authorship must comply with ICMJE criteria, ensuring that all listed authors have made a significant contribution to the research.

1.2. Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers are expected to:

  • provide objective, constructive, and evidence-based evaluations
  • maintain strict confidentiality of submitted manuscripts
  • refrain from using unpublished material for personal advantage
  • disclose any conflicts of interest
  • decline review if lacking expertise or availability

1.3. Responsibilities of Editors

Editors are responsible for:

  • making decisions based solely on the scientific merit of the manuscript
  • ensuring a fair, unbiased, and transparent peer review process
  • preventing any form of discrimination
  • maintaining confidentiality of submissions
  • addressing ethical concerns and allegations of misconduct

1.4. Conflicts of Interest

All participants in the publication process (authors, reviewers, and editors) must disclose any financial, institutional, or personal relationships that could influence their objectivity.

1.5. Handling Misconduct

The journal follows COPE guidelines in cases of:

  • plagiarism
  • data fabrication or falsification
  • duplicate or redundant publication
  • unethical authorship practices

Actions may include:

  • manuscript rejection
  • publication of corrections or retractions
  • notification of authors’ institutions

1.6. Corrections and Retractions

The journal will issue:

  • corrections for minor errors that do not affect the scientific integrity
  • retractions for serious ethical breaches or unreliable findings

All corrections and retractions will be clearly indicated and linked to the original article.

2. Plagiarism & AI Policy

2.1. Plagiarism Policy

All submissions are screened using plagiarism detection software (e.g., iThenticate).

  • acceptable similarity threshold: up to 15–20% (excluding references)

The following are strictly prohibited:

  • direct plagiarism
  • self-plagiarism
  • improper paraphrasing without citation
  • unattributed reuse of previously published material

Manuscripts exceeding acceptable similarity levels may be rejected or returned for revision.

2.2. Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy

The journal acknowledges the use of AI-based tools (e.g., ChatGPT, Grammarly, DeepL), under the following conditions:

Authors must:

  • clearly disclose the use of AI tools in the manuscript (e.g., in Acknowledgments or Methods)
  • ensure full human responsibility for the content
  • verify the accuracy and validity of all AI-generated material

AI tools:

  • cannot be listed as authors
  • cannot assume responsibility for the content

The editorial board reserves the right to reject manuscripts in cases of:

  • undisclosed or excessive AI-generated content
  • lack of human intellectual contribution
  • unreliable or unverifiable AI outputs

3. Editorial Governance

3.1. Editorial Structure

The journal operates under a defined editorial structure, including:

  • Editor-in-Chief
  • Section Editors
  • Editorial Board
  • International Advisory Board

3.2. Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are made independently of:

  • the publisher
  • institutional affiliations
  • financial or commercial interests

The editorial team ensures that decisions are based solely on academic merit.

3.3. Transparency of the Editorial Process

The journal ensures:

  • clearly defined peer review procedures
  • publicly available policies and guidelines
  • transparent editorial decision-making criteria

3.4. Appeals and Complaints

Authors have the right to appeal editorial decisions.

All appeals must be submitted in writing and will be reviewed in a fair and transparent manner, in accordance with journal policies.

3.5. Ethical Oversight

The journal continuously monitors and improves its editorial practices in line with:

  • COPE recommendations
  • international publishing standards
  • evolving best practices in scholarly communication