and publication malpractice statement
Below one may find the ethical behaviour standards
which all parties involved in
publishing in the journal Managerial
Economics (i.e. the author(s), the journal editor and editorial board, the
peer reviewer(s)) should respect and
follow. All the guidelines are based on Elsevier’s policies and COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors (for more
information on publication ethics see: http://publicationethics.org/.)
Duties of the editor and
editor-in-chief of Managerial
Economics is responsible for selecting the articles to be published.
The final decision regarding the publication is made upon the acceptance
of the Editorial Board. When making the decision the legal requirements
(e.g. copyright infringement and plagiarism) as well as the suggestions of
the reviewers must be taken into account.
editor(s) evaluate manuscripts focusing solely on the scientific content -
race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin,
citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors does not have
any impact on the evaluation process.
Confidentiality:None of the members of
the Editorial Board is allowed to disclose any information about a
submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author,
reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the
Duties of Reviewers:
to Editorial Decisions: Double blind peer review process supports the
Editorial Board in making the decisions on submissions. In addition,
thanks to the editor-moderated communication this process may also assist
the author(s) in improving the paper.
Promptness: A referee who feels unable
to review the content of the submission due to lack of sufficient
qualification/expertise or impossibility of facing the promptness of the
process of reviewing should notify the editor and reject the review invitation.
Confidentiality: Each manuscript received
for review must be treated as a confidential document. They must not be
shown to or discussed with other parties.
of Objectivity: The
Editorial Board request the reviews to be conducted according to general
standards of objectivity. Personal criticism of the author is
unacceptable. The referee reports should clearly express the views of the
reviewers based on supporting arguments.
and Conflict of Interest: The new information or ideas obtained through
peer review must be kept confidential and cannot be used for personal
advantage by the referees. When there is a conflicts of interest resulting
from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections
with any of the authors, companies, or institutions related to the
submission the reviewers should not accept the invitation to evaluate the
Duties of Authors:
authors of original research should present an accurate account of the
work undertaken as well as an objective discussion of its importance and
significance. The underlying data should be represented accurately in the
paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to allow
others to replicate the results presented in the work. Fraudulent or
knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are
and Plagiarism: The
authors are responsible to ensure that the submission constitutes original
work. If some previously published results have also been used the authors
must ensure the appropriate citation and quotation. All forms of
plagiarism (e.g. ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper,
copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper without
attribution; claiming results from research conducted by others)
constitute unethical publishing behaviour and are unacceptable.
Redundant or Concurrent Publication: In general, it is inappropriateto publish several manuscripts
describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or
primary publication. In addition submitting one manuscript to more than
one journal at the same time also constitutes unethical publishing
behaviour and is unacceptable.
of Sources: It
is requested to properly acknowledge the work of others. The authors
should refer to the research that have been influential in determining the
nature of the submission. Without an explicit, written permission from the
source the information obtained privately, as in conversation,
correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or
reported. In addition, the 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.
of the Paper: The
authorship should be limited only to those who have made a significant
contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of
the study, i.e. all those who have made significant contributions should
be listed as co-authors. Those who have participated in certain
substantive aspects of the research project should be acknowledged or
listed as contributors. The corresponding author is responsible for
ensuring that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors
are listed as the authors of the paper, and that all co-authors have
approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission.
and Conflicts of Interest: Each of the authors should disclose in the
manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that
might have an influence on the interpretation of the submission. All
sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
errors in published works: When an author finds a significant error or
inaccuracy in the published work, it is the author’s duty to promptly
notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to
retract or correct the paper.