Ethical Guidelines

This code is based on the Principles of Transparency and Best Practices in Academic Publishing from the COPE -Committee on Publication Ethics-: http://publicationethics.org. It applies to editors, reviewers, and authors alike.

  1. Editors
  • Publication Decision: Editors will ensure the selection of the most qualified and specialized reviewers to provide critical and expert assessments of the work, minimizing potential biases.
  • Integrity: Editors evaluate submitted articles solely based on their scientific merit and alignment with the journal's editorial policy.
  • Confidentiality: Editors, editorial board members, and staff commit to not disclosing information about submitted articles to anyone other than authors, reviewers, and editors. Anonymity safeguards the intellectual integrity of the entire process.
  • Conflict of Interest and Disclosure: Editors agree not to use content from submitted articles in their own research without the author's written consent.
  • Editorial Process Timelines: The editorial team commits to timely communication regarding manuscript receipt, evaluation, decision, and estimation of corrections or rejection within established timeframes.
  1. Reviewers
  • Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Reviewers must conduct critical, constructive, and unbiased evaluations to ensure scientific and literary quality within their area of expertise.
  • Time Management: Reviewers commit to completing evaluations promptly to respect deadlines. Reviewers who feel unqualified or unable to meet deadlines must immediately notify the editors.
  • Objectivity: Reviews must be objective, avoiding personal judgments about authors. All assessments must be justified in a detailed report, clearly explaining suggested modifications or rejection reasons. Conflicts of interest require recusal.
  • Confidentiality: Manuscripts are distributed anonymously and must remain confidential. Discussions with third parties require explicit consent from authors or editors.
  • Text/Reference Verification: Reviewers must identify key references omitted by authors and report any similarities between the manuscript and published works.
  • Conflict of Interest and Disclosure: Confidential information obtained during peer review cannot be used for personal purposes. Reviewers must decline reviews involving conflicts of interest.
  1. Authors
  • Originality and Plagiarism: Submitted works must be unpublished and original. Authors confirm data authenticity and absence of plagiarism or data manipulation.
  • Exclusivity Commitment: Submissions to HolCien cannot be under consideration elsewhere and must not contain previously published results.
  • Source Attribution: Authors must properly cite all referenced sources and contributions.
  • Authorship: Authorship order should reflect contribution levels. All significant contributors must be credited.
  • Data Access and Retention: Editors may request underlying data/sources, which must remain anonymized if retained post-publication.

Statement on Misconduct

The editorial process ensures authors verify responsibility for content and declare conflicts of interest. Authorship disputes involve contacting corresponding authors and affiliated institutions. Ethical compliance requires documentation (e.g., ethics committee approval, participant consent).

The journal uses plagiarism-checking software and follows COPE flowcharts for misconduct cases. Disputed decisions may involve external committees.

Retractions and Errata

Articles with confirmed misconduct remain published but marked as retracted. Retractions specify reasons and are cross-referenced. Partial retractions apply to specific sections. Errors not constituting misconduct are corrected via errata.

Retractions/errata are published promptly.

For further details, please visit: