Statement of publication ethics

The peer-reviewed quarterly Hungarian journal “Tér és Társadalom” (TéT; “Space and Society”) follows the highest standards of publication ethics and takes every possible measure to prevent publication malpractice for the research articles and studies it publishes. Regional studies are an interdisciplinary field. This is why TéT tries to attract a colourful and varied representation of work done in the various related disciplines. Because Hungarian is a little known, isolated language, TéT provides above-average-length English abstracts of research articles and studies. Where applicable, TéT subscribes to the Core practices of the Committee of Publication Ethics (COPE).

The TéT content is available online (homepage, table of contents and abstracts as well as authors’ information in English) TéT is an open-access journal, all contents are available free of charge right on the date of publication.

Duties of the editors

Editorial Board

The Editorial Board consists of Hungarian and (about 30%) foreign scientists. The composition of the Editorial Board reflects the diversity of regional studies. Its members provide the networking to domestic and foreign universities and institutes. They define, and make suggestions to revise, editorial policies and aims and supervise the work of the editors. Members of the Editorial Board are selected by the Editor-in-chief. The meeting of the editorial board takes place once in a year.

The Editors

Editors either review work submitted for publication and/or assist the Editor-in-chief in the selection of reviewers. They ensure that manuscripts are solely evaluated for their scholarly content without discrimination and in accordance with freedom of expression. They are obliged to keep strict confidentiality about all information they obtain as a result of their position as editors and will not use such information for personal gain.

Editor-in-chief

The Editor-in-chief is responsible for the day-to-day running of the publishing process. He/she selects the reviewers and decides – on the basis of the reviewers’ reports - which of the articles and studies submitted will be published. If editorial changes are suggested or made, the Editor-in-chief ensures that the version to be published is approved by the author, or corresponding author in the case of co-authorship. The Editor-in-chief is also responsible for the actual online and print-edition production process. The legally responsible publisher of the journal is the current general director of the Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.

The Editor-in-chief will make public in an appropriate form if copyright infringements or plagiarism were detected after publication of work submitted and accepted. He/she supports initiatives designed to reduce misconduct in research and publication, and ensures that all suspected and alleged misconduct is thoroughly and impartially investigated, and appropriate action is taken.

The peer review process

Each study or article submitted is reviewed by at least two independent reviewers (who may be editors or outside experts). Shorter writings in the Scientific Life section, as well as Book Reviews are principally peer-reviewed by one editor only. The Editor-in-chief selects the reviewers, and takes steps that submissions from Editors also receive an unbiased evaluation. The journal acknowledges the contribution of reviewers by publishing a list of reviewers each year. Thereby, the journal encourages academic institutions to recognise peer-review as a scholarly activity.

The peer review process is anonymous, so that only the Editor-in-chief, the Managing Editor and the Editor coordinating the review process know the identities of authors and reviewers. If both reviewers reject the article, the editor-in-chief rejects the publication. If two reviewers fundamentally disagree, a third reviewer is asked. The Editor-in-chief ensures that authors receive reviews in their entirety unless they use offensive language.

The final decision to accept work submitted for publication lies with the Editor-in-chief. He/she shall reverse decisions to accept submissions only if serious problems are identified with the submission which shall be reported clearly to the author(s).

The stages of the reviewing and publishing process can be followed online by those authorised. Any deviation from this peer-review process has to be clearly justified vis-à-vis the author(s) by the Editor-in-chief.

Duties and code of conduct of reviewers

Reviewers are obliged to only report to the Editor-in-chief and/or the Assistant Editor. They have to review the work submitted objectively and thoroughly with reference to relevant, significant and current literature. They are provided with detailed instructions and a report form. The journal encourages reviewers to report possible research and publication misconduct (e.g. inappropriate data manipulation, duplicate publication, plagiarism). If they feel unqualified, or if there occurs a conflict of interest, they have to report this promptly to the Editor-in-chief and withdraw from the review process. Reviewers must keep strict confidentiality, and knowledge and information gained from reviewing work submitted for publication may not be used for their personal advantage. To ensure timely and appropriate reviews as a courtesy towards the authors, the journal ceases to work with reviewers who regularly produce biased, poor quality and/or late reviews.

Obligation of the authors

The authors are instructed in detail of what is expected of them and the format in which to submit their articles. The instructions contain the information that the submission of a paper implies the confirmation by the author that the work is entirely original, has been written in accordance with internationally accepted standards for scholarly publications, has not been previously published and that it has not been submitted for publication elsewhere. In the case of a co-authorship the corresponding author affirms that the publication of the work is approved by all authors in its final version.

Authors have the right to appeal against editorial decisions. This must be in written form, and be sent to the Editor-in-chief directly. The Editor-in-chief evaluates the situation with the help of the Editors, and makes a final decision on the grounds of the journal’s standards. Authors receive a written answer to their appeal.