Manuscript screening

All submitted manuscripts undergo a comprehensive editorial assessment aimed at verifying textual originality, ensuring compliance with publication ethics, and promoting transparency in the use of digital tools, including artificial intelligence (AI) systems. This section should be read in conjunction with the Publication ethics section and the Policy on the Use of Generative AI. It has also been developed with reference to the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE, https://publicationethics.org/).

1. Originality and Plagiarism Screening

1.1. Every manuscript undergoes a mandatory originality check during the initial editorial screening. A specialized text similarity detection system is used for this purpose.

1.2. The purpose of this screening is to identify unattributed textual borrowing, duplicate publications, excessive quotation, and other violations of academic integrity. The editorial office evaluates not only the originality percentage but also the nature and appropriateness of textual borrowing, its scientific context, and the specific characteristics of humanities research (literature reviews, archival sources, methodological descriptions, etc.).

1.3. A textual originality score below 75% is used by the editorial office solely as a technical indicator prompting further examination of the manuscript. It does not indicate that plagiarism has been detected and does not, in itself, constitute grounds for rejection.

The editorial office examines identified similarities, taking into account properly cited quotations, reference lists, archival sources, methodological descriptions, and the authors' previously published works. Where necessary, the editorial office may request additional explanations and justification for the use of borrowed materials. Decisions regarding further consideration of the manuscript are based on an assessment of its content and the explanations provided, rather than on a single numerical indicator.

2. Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools

2.1. The editorial office screens submitted manuscripts for indications of AI tool use, including generative AI systems, through specialized detection tools and expert assessment.

2.2. The use of AI is not considered a violation of publication ethics provided that:

  • its use is disclosed in the manuscript;
  • it is used appropriately and does not replace the author's original scientific work;
  • its use remains within acceptable limits and does not compromise the author's intellectual contribution.

2.3. Authors are responsible for the accuracy of research data and the validity of interpretations. The final decision regarding the acceptability of AI use rests with the editorial board, based on the reviewers' recommendations.

3. Use of Illustrations and Third-Party Materials

3.1. The use of figures, tables, graphs, diagrams, and other visual materials from third-party sources is permitted only when the source is properly acknowledged and permission from the copyright holder has been obtained where required.

3.2. Copyright infringement or the unauthorized use of materials is regarded by the editorial office as a violation of publication ethics.

4. Editorial Decisions and Consequences of Identified Violations

4.1. If plagiarism, duplicate publication, undisclosed use of AI, or other violations are identified, the editorial office reserves the right to:

  • return the manuscript to the authors for revision;
  • refer the manuscript for additional expert evaluation;
  • reject the manuscript.

4.2. All decisions are based on a comprehensive expert assessment, rather than solely on the results of automated screening.