The publisher shall make these guidelines available to all persons involved in the creation and production of the JVM periodical.

The guidelines must be followed by editors, reviewers and authors as part of our joint efforts to provide objective and valuable information to all who are interested in reading and learning from it.

In cases of suspected or proven scientific discrepancy, fraud or plagiarism, the publisher shall, in close cooperation with the editors,

take all necessary measures to investigate the matter. If necessary, this shall include the immediate publication of a notice or clarification or, for the most serious cases of misconduct, the withdrawal of the manuscript concerned. The publisher has a duty to store published research information and ensure it is accessible – via entering into partnerships with organisations and maintaining its own digital archive.

The publisher shall, together with the editors, take the necessary steps to identify and prevent the manuscripts containing publication

of conflicting research or scientific practices, and shall never encourage or knowingly allow such misconduct.

 

2. Editorial Board’s Responsibilities

The JVM editorial board shall accept and evaluate manuscripts based on their academic value (originality, clarity, topicality,

relevance), regardless of the author’s gender, race, ethnicity, political or religious beliefs, social or institutional affiliation. All decisions to edit or publish texts shall be made by the periodical staff without any external influence. The editor-in-chief shall be entitled to determine the content of the periodical and the date of publication of approved texts in compliance with the Rules on publishing the ‘Journal of Varna Museum’.

Тhe editorial board shall ensure that all submitted manuscripts considered for publication are peer-reviewed by one or more experts

in the field. The decision to publish shall be based on the importance and value of the manuscript, the comments and recommendations of the reviewers, and compliance with the JVM requirements and guidelines.

The editorial board must take into account the authors’ and readers’ interests when working on improving or correcting the publication.

The editorial board shall not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the people directly

involved in the evaluation and publication process, i.e. author, reviewers and publisher.

The editorial board shall not use or provide unpublished information about any manuscript to third parties without the authors’

written consent. Any information obtained as a result of work on the manuscript is considered confidential and shall not be used for personal gain. The members of the editorial board declare that they will not participate in the process of reviewing manuscripts that may lead to a conflict of interest, including, but not limited to, competition, partnership or other relationships with an author or related institution. In this case, the editor concerned will ask another member of the editorial board to take charge of the manuscript.

The editorial board shall respond to potential misconduct, whether in relation to a published or unpublished article, and, if necessary,

shall take appropriate measures, including correction, withdrawal, publication of a clarification or any other appropriate action.

 

3. Reviewers’ Responsibilities

All manuscripts received for review are confidential documents and must be treated as such. They should not be shown to,

or discussed with, any persons not authorised by the editor-in-chief (in exceptional and specific circumstances). This rule shall also apply to invited reviewers who decline the invitation to review the manuscript.

Any invited reviewer who feels unqualified to review the manuscript, or is unable to do so within the deadline, must immediately

notify the editorial board and decline the invitation, so that another reviewer can be selected.

Any invited reviewer who has a conflict of interest with any of the authors, companies or institutions involved in the manuscript must

immediately declare it to the editors to enable the selection of another reviewer.

Peer review is an essential part of official scientific communication and a cornerstone of science. Peer review helps editors make editorial

decisions, and communication between editors and authors can help authors improve their manuscripts.

Reviews must be conducted objectively and conclusions should be worded in clear supporting arguments so that authors can use them to

improve the manuscript. Personal criticism of authors is unacceptable.

Reviewers should identify and notify editors of texts used but not cited by the authors, as well as any significant similarities or overlaps

between the manuscript in question and any other manuscript they are familiar with.

The unpublished material described in the manuscript should not be used for the purposes of research conducted by the reviewers

without the express written consent of the authors.

Privileged information or ideas obtained during the peer review must remain confidential and not be used for personal purposes

by the reviewers. This also applies to reviewers who have rejected an invitation to review a manuscript.

 

4. Authors’ Responsibilities

All submitted manuscripts must be original research papers that have not been published in, or submitted for, review to any other journals/

volumes. Submitting a manuscript to more than one edition at a time is considered unethical and unacceptable behaviour.

Only persons making a significant contribution to the concept, data acquisition, analysis, research interpretation, manuscript preparation, its

critical evaluation of intellectual content or participants in the finalisation of the paper and its submission for publication should be included as its authors, since they must be able to take public responsibility for the contents.

Authors must ensure that they have written and submitted entirely original manuscripts and properly referenced all sources and/or quotations

by other authors. Plagiarism in all its forms is considered unethical and unacceptable behaviour. Authors should also declare any conflict of interest (including financial) that could affect the results or the interpretation thereof in the manuscript.

Authors must provide accurate information about the submitted research and the results, as well as an objective justification of their

significance. The manuscript should contain sufficient details and references to allow others to use the methodology and results. Fraudulent or deliberately inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

Authors are required to participate in the peer review process and respond promptly to editors’ queries regarding primary data, textual

clarifications or copyright. Authors must respond promptly to reviewers’ comments, as well as correct and resubmit their manuscript in line with the comments and guidelines provided.

If the authors find significant errors or inaccuracies in their own text, it is their duty to notify the editors or publisher immediately and

cooperate with them to correct or, if necessary, withdraw the paper. If a third party reports that the published text contains a material error or inaccuracy and objectively substantiates its opinion, it is the responsibility of the authors to correct or withdraw the manuscript immediately or provide the editors with evidence of the correctness of the text.

Authors may be asked to provide the primary study data for editorial review together with the manuscript, and should be prepared to make this

data publicly available. Authors should ensure that other scientists and researchers have access to this data after the publication of the paper, but only so far as within the bounds of intellectual property and copyright laws, and only with the permission of the owners of the primary information.