Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

By submitting an article to the journal Philotheos authors agree to comply with the following Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement.

Duties / Responsibilities of Authors

Originality and Plagiarism

All manuscripts must be the original work of authors and not evidence plagiarism. Plagiarism or self-plagiarism are prohibited and will lead to the rejection of publication material.

Authorship of the paper

Authorship of a manuscript should be limited to authors who have made significant contributions.

Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication

Authors must not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently.

Acknowledgement of sources

Authors must properly and accurately acknowledge the work of others.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest and financial support

Authors should disclose any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript and acknowledge individuals or organizations that have provided financial support for research.

Data access and retention

Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with manuscripts for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data if possible.

Participation in the review process

Authors are obliged to participate in the peer review process.

Duties / Responsibilities of Editors

Publication decisions

Editors are responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal should be reviewed and published. 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. Current legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism should also be considered.

Fair play 

Editors should ensure the integrity of the publication review process. As such, editors should not reveal either the identity of authors of manuscripts to the reviewers, or the identity of reviewers to authors. Nevertheless, the editors should also ensure that reviewers are independent of the authors and are not affiliated with the same institution.


Editors must treat received manuscripts for review as confidential documents and must not disclose any information about submitted manuscripts to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Editors and any editorial staff must not use materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript (published or unpublished) for their own research without the author’s written authorization.


In the event that a journal’s publisher or editors are made aware of any allegation of research misconduct the publisher and editors shall deal with allegations appropriately.

Responsibility of Reviewers


Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information.

Standards of objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism of the author.

Contribution to editorial decision

Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.


Reviewers should complete their reviews according to the given Form within 60 days at the latest.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Reviewers should not review 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 connected to the papers.

Publication ethics

Research misconduct

Publishers and editors shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred. In no case shall a journal or its editors encourage such misconduct, or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place.

Correction and retraction

If needed the editors and publishers should ask for the correction of the published paper. In cases of proven academic misconduct, the editors and the publisher should retract the paper and offer apology to the journal readership.