Policies

Aims and Scope

«pl.it / rassegna italiana di argomenti polacchi» is a multilingual, open access, and peer reviewed journal of Polish Studies. It publishes academic articles, discussions and book reviews. It aims to promote, disseminate and exchange knowledge and research about Polish culture and literature. Particular attention is paid to new methodologies and interdisciplinary approaches.

Section Policies

Articles

 Open Submissions  Indexed  Peer Reviewed

Notes and Discussions

 Open Submissions  Indexed  Peer Reviewed

Book reviews

 Open Submissions  Indexed  Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

Submissions are first evaluated by the Editors and the members of the Editorial Boards. If the manuscript is considered suitable for publication, it is sent to at least two external academic reviewers. The peer review process is double-blind to provide anonymity for both authors and reviewers. Referees are asked to evaluate the manuscript within four weeks. If the reviews are positive, the manuscript is accepted without restrictions. If the reviews are positive, but the manuscript needs to be revised, the author is expected to submit the revised version. If the reviews are totally discordant, a third opinion is sought. Publication decisions by the Editors are final. Authors retain the copyright of their works.

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

Articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International.

You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use. You may not use the material for commercial purposes. If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you may not distribute the modified material.

Licenza Creative Commons

Publication Frequency

This journal is published once per year in December.

No-charge policy

This journal does not apply article processing charges (APCs) or submission charges.

Indexing

The journal is indexed in ERIH PLUS and DOAJ.

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

(Composed using the Publishing ethics resource kit and in compliance with Elsevier recommendations)

The publication of an article in the peer-reviewed journal «pl.it» aims at contributing to the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It reflects the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behaviour for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewers, the publisher and the society. The editorial board ensures that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.

Duties of authors

(These guidelines are based on existing Elsevier policies)

Reporting standards

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review and professional publication articles should be accurate and objective, and editorial ‘opinion’ should be clearly identified as such.

Originality and plagiarism

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication

An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper. Publication of some kinds of articles in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, if the authors and editors of the journals concerned agree to the secondary publication. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.

Acknowledgement of sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

Duties of the Editorial Board

(These guidelines are based on existing Elsevier policies and COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors)

Publication decisions

The editors and the editorial board of the peer-reviewed journal «pl.it» are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. Editors and editorial board should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality

The editor and editorial board must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

Involvement and cooperation in investigations

An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies, and if the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant. Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.

Duties of reviewers

(These guidelines are based on existing Elsevier policies and COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors)

Contribution to editorial decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. Elsevier shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.

Promptness

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention on any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and conflict of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.