The procedure of reviewing publications

The procedure of reviewing publications The procedure of reviewing articles published in the journal “Ordines Militares Colloquia Torunensia Historica. Yearbook for the Study of the Military Orders” is as follows: Two independent reviewers are appointed to define the academic value of each text sent to the editorial office. Each reviewer of a given text is an employee of scientific institutions in the country other than the country of origin of the author of the article. Neither of the reviewers knows the identity of the other reviewer. The names of the reviewers of given texts remain secret and they are kept by the editorial team. However, in each volume there appears a list of reviewers cooperating with the editorial staff. Reviews are in a written form. To publish an article it is necessary to obtain the agreement of both reviewers who express and justify their opinions concerning the academic nature and the scientific value of a reviewed text.   Ethics Statement The journal “Ordines Militares Colloquia Torunensia Historica. Yearbook for the Study of the Military Orders” implements ethics rules as well as “ghostwriting”, “guest authorship” and plagiarism detection procedures, which are prepared in accordance with COPE standards. For the details visit http://www.apcz.pl/czasopisma/ index.php/OM/about/index or http://www.ordinesmilitares.umk.plThe procedure of reviewing publications The procedure of reviewing articles published in the journal “Ordines Militares Colloquia Torunensia Historica. Yearbook for the Study of the Military Orders” is as follows: Two independent reviewers are appointed to define the academic value of each text sent to the editorial office. Each reviewer of a given text is an employee of scientific institutions in the country other than the country of origin of the author of the article. Neither of the reviewers knows the identity of the other reviewer. The names of the reviewers of given texts remain secret and they are kept by the editorial team. However, in each volume there appears a list of reviewers cooperating with the editorial staff. Reviews are in a written form. To publish an article it is necessary to obtain the agreement of both reviewers who express and justify their opinions concerning the academic nature and the scientific value of a reviewed text.   Ethics Statement The journal “Ordines Militares Colloquia Torunensia Historica. Yearbook for the Study of the Military Orders” implements ethics rules as well as “ghostwriting”, “guest authorship” and plagiarism detection procedures, which are prepared in accordance with COPE standards. For the details visit http://www.apcz.pl/czasopisma/ index.php/OM/about/index or http://www.ordinesmilitares.umk.plThe procedure of reviewing publications The procedure of reviewing articles published in the journal “Ordines Militares Colloquia Torunensia Historica. Yearbook for the Study of the Military Orders” is as follows: Two independent reviewers are appointed to define the academic value of each text sent to the editorial office. Each reviewer of a given text is an employee of scientific institutions in the country other than the country of origin of the author of the article. Neither of the reviewers knows the identity of the other reviewer. The names of the reviewers of given texts remain secret and they are kept by the editorial team. However, in each volume there appears a list of reviewers cooperating with the editorial staff. Reviews are in a written form. To publish an article it is necessary to obtain the agreement of both reviewers who express and justify their opinions concerning the academic nature and the scientific value of a reviewed text.   Ethics Statement The journal “Ordines Militares Colloquia Torunensia Historica. Yearbook for the Study of the Military Orders” implements ethics rules as well as “ghostwriting”, “guest authorship” and plagiarism detection procedures, which are prepared in accordance with COPE standards. For the details visit http://www.apcz.pl/czasopisma/ index.php/OM/about/index or http://www.ordinesmilitares.umk.p

The procedure of reviewing publications

The procedure of reviewing publications The procedure of reviewing articles published in the journal “Ordines Militares Ordines Militares Colloquia Torunensia Historica. Yearbook for the Study of the Military Orders” is as follows: Two independent reviewers are appointed to define the academic value of each text sent to the editorial office. Each reviewer of a given text is an employee of scientific institutions  in the country other than the country of origin of the author of the article. Neither of the reviewers knows the identity of the other reviewer. The names of the reviewers of given texts remain secret and they are kept by the editorial team. However, in each volume there appears a list of reviewers cooperating with the editorial staff. Reviews are in a written form. To publish an article it is necessary to obtain the agreement of both reviewers who express and justify  their opinions concerning the academic nature and the scientific value of a reviewed text. Ethics Statement The journal “Ordines Militares Colloquia Torunensia Historica. Yearbook for the Study of the Military Orders” implements ethics rules as well as “ghostwriting”, “guest authorship” and plagiarism detection procedures, which are prepared in accordance with COPE standards. For the details visit http://www.apcz.pl/czasopisma/index.php/OM/about/index or http://www.ordinesmilitares.umk.plThe procedure of reviewing publications The procedure of reviewing articles published in the journal “Ordines Militares Ordines Militares Colloquia Torunensia Historica. Yearbook for the Study of the Military Orders” is as follows: Two independent reviewers are appointed to define the academic value of each text sent to the editorial office. Each reviewer of a given text is an employee of scientific institutions  in the country other than the country of origin of the author of the article. Neither of the reviewers knows the identity of the other reviewer. The names of the reviewers of given texts remain secret and they are kept by the editorial team. However, in each volume there appears a list of reviewers cooperating with the editorial staff. Reviews are in a written form. To publish an article it is necessary to obtain the agreement of both reviewers who express and justify  their opinions concerning the academic nature and the scientific value of a reviewed text. Ethics Statement The journal “Ordines Militares Colloquia Torunensia Historica. Yearbook for the Study of the Military Orders” implements ethics rules as well as “ghostwriting”, “guest authorship” and plagiarism detection procedures, which are prepared in accordance with COPE standards. For the details visit http://www.apcz.pl/czasopisma/index.php/OM/about/index or http://www.ordinesmilitares.umk.plThe procedure of reviewing publications The procedure of reviewing articles published in the journal “Ordines Militares Ordines Militares Colloquia Torunensia Historica. Yearbook for the Study of the Military Orders” is as follows: Two independent reviewers are appointed to define the academic value of each text sent to the editorial office. Each reviewer of a given text is an employee of scientific institutions  in the country other than the country of origin of the author of the article. Neither of the reviewers knows the identity of the other reviewer. The names of the reviewers of given texts remain secret and they are kept by the editorial team. However, in each volume there appears a list of reviewers cooperating with the editorial staff. Reviews are in a written form. To publish an article it is necessary to obtain the agreement of both reviewers who express and justify  their opinions concerning the academic nature and the scientific value of a reviewed text. Ethics Statement The journal “Ordines Militares Colloquia Torunensia Historica. Yearbook for the Study of the Military Orders” implements ethics rules as well as “ghostwriting”, “guest authorship” and plagiarism detection procedures, which are prepared in accordance with COPE standards. For the details visit http://www.apcz.pl/czasopisma/index.php/OM/about/index or http://www.ordinesmilitares.umk.p

From the Editor

From the Edito

From the Editor

From the Edito

In response to 'Celebrate citation: flipping the pedagogy of plagiarism in Qatar'

In her article (http://uobrep.openrepository.com/uobrep/handle/10547/335947) Molly McHarg makes several points that I agree with, particularly that for the majority of students the plagiarism is not deliberate but is due to a lack of understanding of how to reference correctly

Impact Factor: outdated artefact or stepping-stone to journal certification?

A review of Garfield's journal impact factor and its specific implementation as the Thomson Reuters Impact Factor reveals several weaknesses in this commonly-used indicator of journal standing. Key limitations include the mismatch between citing and cited documents, the deceptive display of three decimals that belies the real precision, and the absence of confidence intervals. These are minor issues that are easily amended and should be corrected, but more substantive improvements are needed. There are indications that the scientific community seeks and needs better certification of journal procedures to improve the quality of published science. Comprehensive certification of editorial and review procedures could help ensure adequate procedures to detect duplicate and fraudulent submissions.Comment: 25 pages, 12 figures, 6 table

Welcome to Parks Stewardship Forum: An Introduction to the Journal from the Editors

An overview of Parks Stewardship Forum from the managing editors, published in the inaugural issue of the journal, whose theme is "Climate Change and Protected Places: Adapting to New Realities.

Editorial 2.3

The overarching theme for this special edition is academic integrity. The theme prompted papers which ranged widely in stance, purpose and methodology from authors in Australia and New Zealand. Many authors began by defining words (i.e. \u27integrity\u27, \u27plagiarism\u27 or \u27original\u27) and I propose doing the same in these opening remarks. The word that struck me in the JUTLP title was \u27practice\u27 and I kept that word in mind when selecting papers. I was asking myself: \u27How might the special edition address the needs of practitioners themselves? What can the authors contribute to issues effecting teachers, students, university administrators and/or other researchers concerned with actions and interventions designed to encourage academic integrity? The result was accepting more papers than could be accommodated in a single issue. It may be that the volume of submissions just reflects academics\u27 need to publish but more positively, it could also indicate how much energy and thought is being expended by practitioners in universities on this issue. These papers all offer something useful, I believe, to one or more of the practitioner groups

The Paroxetine 352 Bipolar Study Revisited: Deconstruction of Corporate and Academic Misconduct

Medical ghostwriting is the practice in which pharmaceutical companies engage an outside writer to draft a manuscript submitted for publication in the names of “honorary authors,” typically academic key opinion leaders. Using newly-posted documents from paroxetine litigation, we show how the use of ghostwriters and key opinion leaders contributed to the publication of a medical journal article containing manipulated outcome data to favor the proprietary medication. The article was ghostwritten and managed by SmithKline Beecham, now GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and Scientific Therapeutics Information, Inc. without acknowledging their contribution in the published article. The named authors with financial ties to GSK, had little or no direct involvement in the paroxetine 352 bipolar trial results and most had not reviewed any of the manuscript drafts. The manuscript was originally rejected by peer review; however, its ultimate acceptance to the American Journal of Psychiatry was facilitated by the journal editor who also had financial ties to GSK. Thus, GSK was able to take an under-powered and non-informative trial with negative results and present it as a positive marketing vehicle for off-label promotion of paroxetine for bipolar depression. In addition to the commercial spin of paroxetine efficacy, important protocol-designated safety data were unreported that may have shown paroxetine to produce potentially harmful adverse events