Ethics and Malpractice Statement
The Hungarian Historical Review is committed to the highest ethical standards in peer review and publication. We strongly support the aims of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and strive to implement their guidance.
- Editors and Editorial Board
The editorial board and other governing bodies of The Hungarian Historical Review (editors, advisory board) are composed of highly recognized experts in Hungarian and Central and Eastern European history. Their full names and affiliations are available at https://hunghist.org/journal-info/editors-boards
- Publication Ethics
Editors' responsibilities
Publication decisions
The editor is responsible for deciding which of the papers submitted to the journal will be published. The editor will evaluate manuscripts without regard to the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy. The decision will be based on the paper’s importance, originality and clarity, and the study’s validity and its relevance to the journal's scope.
Confidentiality
The editor and any editorial staff 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.
Reviewers' responsibilities
Contribution to editorial decisions
The peer-reviewing process assists the editor and the editorial board in making editorial decisions and may also serve the author in improving the paper.
The peer reviewers are volunteers and receive no fees from The Hungarian Historical Review.
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 withdraw from the review process.
Confidentiality
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be disclosed 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 cases in which relevant published work referred to in the paper has not been cited in the reference section. They should point out whether observations or arguments derived from other publications are accompanied by the respective source.
Reviewers will notify the editor of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
- Policies on authorship and contributorship
When submitting a manuscript each author
- represents that the submission is original and gives the Hungarian Historical Review the right of first refusal,
- accepts that no royalty will be paid for any article,
- assigns to the Hungarian Historical Review the copyright to the Article whereby the Publisher shall have the exclusive right to publish the Contribution and translations of it wholly or in part throughout the world during the full term of copyright including renewals and extensions and all subsidiary rights.
Authors' duties
Reporting standards
Authors of original research papers should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
Data access and retention
Authors could be asked to provide the raw data of their study together with the paper for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if practicable. In any event authors should ensure accessibility of such data to other competent professionals for at least 2 years after publication.
Originality plagiarism and acknowledgement of sources
Authors will submit only entirely original works (overlap with other published works cannot exceed 30%), and will appropriately cite or quote the work and/or words of others.
Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work should also be cited. Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication in general, papers describing essentially the same research should not be published. Submitting the same paper to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Manuscripts which have been published as copyrighted material elsewhere cannot be submitted. In addition, manuscripts under review by the journal should not be resubmitted to copyrighted publications. However, by submitting a manuscript, the author(s) retain the rights to the published material. In case of publication they permit the use of their works.
Authorship of the paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author ensures that all contributing co-authors and no uninvolved persons are included in the author list. The corresponding author will also verify that all co-authors have approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Fundamental errors in published works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and to cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper in form of an erratum.
- Process of Complaints and Appeals
The Hungarian Historical Review follows the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines on appeals to journal editor decisions and complaints about a journal’s editorial management of the peer review process.
Editor decisions
The editors of the Hungarian Historical Review welcome genuine appeals against editorial decisions. However, the author must provide strong evidence or new data/information in response to the editor's and reviewers' comments.
If the author wishes to appeal the decision of the journal’s editor, please send his/her appeal to the editorial office: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Please address this letter to the editor with whom you have been in contact and clearly state the basis of your appeal.
The author should explain in detail why he or she disagrees with the decision, including specific responses to the editor's and/or reviewers' comments that contributed to the reject decision.
The author should provide any new information or data that the author would like the journal to take into account.
The author must provide evidence if he/she believes that the reviewer has made technical errors in evaluating the manuscript, including if the author believes that the reviewer may have a conflict of interest.
The author has 90 days from the date of the decline letter to file an appeal. The author should send a letter to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. appealing the decision and responding in detail to the comments of the reviewers provided in the decline letter. After receiving an appeal, the editors may involve the editorial board in the process, depending on the nature of the appeal. The editors will respond to the appeal within 90 days. The editors may confirm their decision to reject the manuscript, ask for a revision of the manuscript or request further peer review of the original manuscript. The editors will consider one appeal per article and decisions on appeals are final. Timely review of new submissions and decision-making take precedence over appeals. If the editor believes that the appeal is without merit and that the decline decision should stand, then the decline recommendation, along with the paper’s original review details, will be forwarded to the Editor-in-Chief for a final decision.
For more information about a journal’s appeals procedure, please contact the editorial office: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .
It is important to note that The Hungarian Historical Review cannot consider appeals where the subject matter is the focus of ongoing legal proceedings. Similarly, we reserve the right to decline, suspend or to discontinue an appeal made under this policy in the event that legal proceedings commence and the claim concerns the same subject matter as the appeal.
- Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Editors
Editors should not make any editorial decisions or get involved in the editorial process if they have any Conflict of Interest (monetary, collaborative or otherwise) for a submitted manuscript.
An editor may also have a Conflict of Interest if a manuscript is submitted from their own academic department or from their institution in such situations. In this case, a member of the editorial staff who is not affiliated with the academic department will handle the manuscript.
When editors submit their own research work to their journal, a colleague in the editorial office should manage the manuscript and the editor/author should recuse himself or herself from discussion and decisions about it.
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted paper will not be used by the editor or the members of the editorial board for their own research purposes without the author's explicit written consent.
Reviewers
To make sure that the review process is freed from conflicts:
Editors should select a guest editor when there is a conflict of interest with respect to an author. Editors should ensure that reviewers are freed from conflict of interest with respect to an author.
Reviewers should contact the editorial office to declare any potential conflicts of interest in advance of refereeing an article.
Minor conflicts do not disqualify a reviewer from reporting on an article but will be taken into consideration when considering the referees’ recommendations.
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the papers.
Authors
Authors should follow the COPE’s guidelines – Undisclosed conflict of interest in a submitted manuscript
All authors and co-authors are required to reveal any potential conflict of interest when submitting their article (e.g. employment, consulting fees, research contracts, stock ownership, patent licenses, advisory affiliations, etc.). If the article is subsequently accepted for publication, this information should be included in the end section.
All authors should include a statement disclosing any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that may be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project behind the publication should be disclosed.
- Data sharing and reproducibility
Authors are encouraged to share or make available any data and materials supporting the results or analyses presented in their manuscripts.
Please note that data should only be shared if it is ethically correct to do so, where this does not violate the protection of human subjects, or other valid ethical, privacy, or security concerns.
We encourage authors to share and make data open where this does not violate protection of human subjects or other valid subject privacy concerns. Authors are further encouraged to cite data and provide a data availability statement.
By submitting an article, authors agree to make their data available upon reasonable request. It’s up to the author to determine whether a request is reasonable.
Authors are advised to deposit data in a recognized data repository that can mint a persistent digital identifier, such as a digital object identifier (DOI), and recognizes a long-term preservation plan.
We highly encourage researchers to consider the FAIR Data Principles when depositing data.
At the point of submission, the author will be encouraged to provide the DOI, pre-registered DOI, hyperlink, or other persistent identifier associated with the data set(s) cited in the manuscript.
It is the author’s responsibility to ensure the soundness of any data. Any errors in the data rest solely with the producers of the dataset(s). Peer reviewers and editors will be considering a manuscript’s data availability statement and whether the authors have complied with the journal’s data sharing policy.
- Policy on ethical oversight
The Hungarian Historical Review follows the СОРE definition of Ethical oversight: “Ethical oversight should include, but is not limited to, policies on consent to publication, publication on vulnerable populations, ethical conduct of research using animals, ethical conduct of research using human subjects, handling confidential data and of business/marketing practices”. Following this definition, the editors of the Hungarian Historical Review work under the issue of observing ethical principles. The journal will be bound to consider the appeals for professional and scientific activity concerning the non-observance of the ethical principles by our authors. We are also ready to consider other appeals in case they are not anonymous and substantiated.
- Intellectual Property, Copyright, and Licensing Policy
Fees
No fees of any kind will be charged to authors at any time before or after publication.
Intellectual Property and Copyright
Author Rights & Responsibilities
Authors certify that their submitted manuscript (and any supporting items) are their own intellectual property and the copyright has not been transferred to others.
Authors certify that the manuscript contains no plagiarism, no fabrication, no falsification, no manipulated citations, and that the manuscript conforms to JSS authorship policies.
Authors accept that no royalty will be paid for any article,
Authors assign to the Hungarian Historical Review the copyright to the Article whereby the Publisher shall have the exclusive right to publish the Contribution and translations of it wholly or in part throughout the world during the full term of copyright including renewals and extensions and all subsidiary rights.
All contributors of published articles will have free access to the PDF version of their article.
Authors certify that for any copyrighted tables, figures, data, text, etc. permission has been obtained from the copyright holders to reproduce.
Authors retain the full right to modify, reshare, repost, or archive any version of their copyrighted work.
Authors agree to keep confidential all communications, comments, or reports between authors and reviewers or editors.
Editorial Team Responsibilities
All review comments and reports remain the intellectual property of the reviewer or editor.
Reviewers and editors agree to keep confidental all communications, comments, or reports between authors and reviewers, or editors.
Reviewers and editors agree to keep all manuscripts, revisions, and drafts confidential, with the exception of the final published galley(s).
License
Authors agree that all accepted manuscripts, galleys, and submitted supporting documents are immediately and irrevocably released under a Creative Commons (CC BY 4.0) license.
Reporting
Suspicion of violations of this policy should be made to the editor-in-chief via the Process of Complaints and Appeals (see at 4.)
Current legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism should also be considered.
- Options for Post-Publication Discussions and Corrections.
We recognize the significance of post-publication discussions on published research and we are open to such discussions.
Post-publication discussions may be published online after review and are usually accompanied by a response from the original authors.
Handling Post-Publication Matters:
To maintain the integrity of scientific research, The Hungarian Historical Review carries out investigations regarding the concerns raised by authors and/or readers. However, authors are always provided a chance to respond to all complaints/ comments. We may require reviewers to go over the original data and consult with experts involved, in order to solve and conclude the investigation. The following actions may be taken depending on the severity of the issue:
A Corrigendum may be published.
An Editor’s Note and/or Editorial Expression of Concern may be published; a second notification might also be published once the investigation is complete.
The article may be retracted.
If the outcome of the investigation highlights some serious issues, such as fraud or academic misconduct, then the author’s institution may be informed about the matter.
The Hungarian Historical Review does not intend to target any individual as its goal is to ensure transparency. The readers may, instead, be referred to the concerned reports of the institutional investigation, but only if these are publicly made available. While the investigation is in progress, which usually takes time to conclude, an Editor’s Notes and/or Editorial Expressions of Concern is published to notify the readers about the criticism received in respect of the published article as recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
An Editor's Note is a message for the readers if the journal has launched an investigation in case of concerns raised on the published content. It is just an online update and is not indexed. An Editorial Expression of Concern is a declaration by the Editor notifying readers about any serious concerns shadowing the probity of the published article.
Editor’s Notes and Editorial Expressions of Concern are replaced by publishing a revision―such as a corrigendum or retraction―once a decision is finalized after a complete investigation.
- Process for identification of and dealing with allegations of research misconduct
Authors are to report original research and present an accurate account of the work done and where there is substantial evidence of research misconduct in a published or submitted manuscript, the Editor-in-Chief will take steps to ensure that such identified misconduct(s) are prevented. Research misconduct in publishing may include but is not limited to falsification of results, deliberate citation manipulation, duplicate publication, and text recycling.
If research misconduct is discovered in a published article, the Editor-in-Chief shall take steps as outlined in COPE’s guidelines in dealing with the allegations.
The action that will be taken will be dependent on several factors depending on the nature of the misconduct.
Allegation of research misconduct /COPE
The Hungarian Historical Review takes with all seriousness, allegations of research misconduct pre and post-publication.
The issue of misconduct is strongly investigated and resolved using the guidance provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
In this regard, the research institution has the following responsibilities:
- to have a research integrity officer and publish their contact details prominently
- to inform The Hungarian Historical Review about cases of proven misconduct
- to give a prompt and honest response on research when requested
- to initiate inquiries into allegations of research misconduct or unacceptable publication practice raised by journal
- to have a policy supporting responsible research and systems in place for investigating suspected case of misconduct.
The editorial board has the following responsibilities:
- to inform the institution concerned of misconduct and provide evidence
- to cooperate with the investigation and respond to the institution’s questions about misconduct
- to retract issues or corrections according to COPE’s guideline on retraction when an allegation is proven
- to respond to institutions and other organizations that investigate cases of research misconduct.
- Access and Archiving
The Hungarian Historical Review strongly supports the Open Access initiative.
Authors agree that all accepted manuscripts, galleys, and submitted supporting documents are immediately and irrevocably released under a Creative Commons (CC BY 4.0) license.
Abstracts and full texts of all articles published by The Hungarian Historical Review are freely accessible to everyone immediately after publication at the website of the journal (http://hunghist.org/), and all articles are deposited, archived and freely accessible through the portal of REAL-J - repository of the Library and Information Center, Hungarian Academy of Sciences (http://real-j.mtak.hu/). Articles and reviews are also archived in JSTOR at https://www.jstor.org/journal/hunghistrevi .
- Ownership, Management, Support and Revenue sources
The Hungarian Historical Review is a peer-reviewed international journal of the social sciences and humanities with a focus on Hungarian, East-Central, and Southeast European history published quarterly (May, July, October, December) by the Institute of History, Research Center for the Humanities, Center of Excellence of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Hungarian Research Network (HUN-REN) https://hun-ren.hu/en
Institutional support: Supported by the National Cultural Fund of Hungary, Hungarian Research Network (HUN-REN), and the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. Revenue source: JSTOR annual revenue sharing.
No fees of any kind will be charged to authors at any time before or after publication, thus publishing fees or waiver status do not influence editorial decision-making.
The Journal accepts no advertising.
