Publication ethics
1.The editors undertake to ensure that the highest standards of ethics and scientific integrity are maintained at all stages of the publishing process.
2. Authors of reviews prepared for publication and authors submitting a text for publication are obliged to maintain the highest standards of ethics and scientific integrity at all stages of the publishing process.
3. Detection of a conflict of interest occurring between a member of the Editorial Board or a reviewer and the author shall result in the exclusion of the member of the Editorial Board or the reviewer from the further publishing process.
4. The Editorial Board recognizes as binding the ethical standards of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), applies them and requires their application by reviewers and authors submitting texts for publication.
5. All decisions regarding the publishing process are based on objective substantive criteria including the Review Procedure published on the website. When evaluating a paper submitted for publication, non-substantive circumstances such as the author's title/degree, affiliation, background, among others, are not relevant.
6. The editors comply with generally applicable laws, including copyright and data protection laws.
7. The research results presented by the authors in the submitted papers will not be used without agreement with the author before publication.
8. Personal data obtained by the Editor in the course of the publishing process will be used only for the purposes of this process.
9. The authors are obliged to disclose any sources used in the creation of the work.
10.The Editorial Board shall use software for the detection of plagiarism and the participation of artificial intelligence in the creation of works submitted for publication (Unified Anti-Plagiarism System).
11. detection of the author's lack of scientific integrity consisting in: committing plagiarism, admitting the creation of a work using artificial intelligence, practices of ghost writing, ghost authorship, honorary authorship or guest authorship, precludes publication of the work, is disclosed on the journal's website, and involves informing the academic institution to which the author is affiliated.
12. The editors condemn the practice of parallel, competitive submission of works for publication in several publishing houses. Original texts, previously unpublished, are accepted for publication in.
13. Publication in the journal is free of charge on the part of the author.
14. Texts published in the journal are available on an open access basis.
15. Annales Pomorienses. Ius notes that generative artificial intelligence tools may provide technical and editorial support in the preparation of academic texts. Their use is permissible only where it does not compromise the author’s independence, the reliability of research, or the principles of publication integrity. The use of such tools should be transparent, auxiliary in nature, and subject to the author’s control.
15.1. Artificial intelligence systems do not have the status of authors of academic publications. They may therefore not be indicated as authors, co-authors, or entities jointly responsible for the preparation of an article. Responsibility for the publication includes, in particular, its substantive accuracy, originality, compliance with academic standards, and respect for the rights of third parties. This responsibility rests solely with the authors submitting the text to the journal.
15.2. AI tools may be used to a limited extent, primarily as assistance in the formal, linguistic, or editorial preparation of the text. This applies in particular to correcting linguistic, grammatical, and punctuation errors, translating the text or its fragments, improving the clarity and communicativeness of the text, and organising, editing, and formatting the text. The use of AI must not result in the tool assuming a fundamental role in creating the argumentation, analysis, or results of the academic work.
15.3. Any use of AI tools that could lead to a falsification of the research process or of the content of the publication shall be deemed inadmissible. In particular, it is prohibited to use AI to create fictitious, non-existent, or unverified data; to construct research results without actually conducting the research; to alter the results of analyses in a manner inconsistent with the research material; to replace the author’s own academic assessment, interpretation, and critical reflection; or to generate footnotes, citations, or bibliographies without independent verification. Authors are obliged to verify every piece of content prepared with the use of AI, especially where it concerns sources, data, academic claims, or research findings.
15.4. Authors should disclose any use of generative artificial intelligence tools where such use was relevant to the preparation of the manuscript. Information on the use of AI should be included in the first footnote to the article. The statement should indicate which tool was used, for what purpose it was used, and which part of the text its use concerned. An example statement is as follows: “The authors declare that, in preparing this text, they used [name of tool] for linguistic and stylistic support. All suggestions obtained were verified by the authors, who bear full responsibility for the final version of the article.”
15.5. Materials submitted to the journal in the course of the editorial and review procedure are confidential. For this reason, editors and reviewers should not enter manuscript content into AI tools or use such tools to assess, summarise, or analyse submitted texts. The duty of confidentiality covers both the content of the article and information obtained in connection with the review process.
15.6. The use of generative artificial intelligence does not release authors, editors, or reviewers from the obligation to comply with the principles of publication ethics. In particular, it is inadmissible to use AI in a manner that leads to plagiarism, unreliable presentation of results, concealment of the author’s actual contribution, fabrication of data, or misleading readers and the Editorial Board. AI tools may support the preparation of a text, but they cannot replace responsible academic work.
