„Lithuanian Musicology“ is a periodic scientific journal of the humanities founded in 2000. Every year one volume of the journal is published. Editorial board includes authoritative scientists from Lithuania as well as foreign countries, humanitarians from institutions of different fields. Publications submitted to the journal must be fully original, never published before in other editions. While using other sources as well as other scientific material, the authors must invoke the rules of fair quoting – cases of plagiarism is unacceptable. The journal protects copyright as well as academic ethics standards. In turn, the editor and editorial board commits not to reveal any information about the submitted papers, with an exception of the author himself, co-authors, reviewers, potential reviewers and other persons related to the publishing (language editors, publishers and etc.). The journal applies the standard of peer review. Reviewers treat papers as confidential documents, peer review relies on the objectivity as well as the clear argumentation.
In case of the author noticing fundamental errors left after his paper is published he is obligated to inform the journal’s editor and cooperate in the process of correction. The editors and editorial board is not responsible for the opinions, views and contents published in the submitted papers. The responsibility for the originality, veracity and errors lies on the author.
Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
PUBLICATION AND AUTHORSHIP
* Editing and publication of the journal Lithuanian Musicology follows the established principles of the academic ethics.
* Articles previously published elsewhere are not accepted for publication.
* Plagiarism, i.e. wrong appropriation of somebody else’s text, research methodology, ideas, or results, or presentation of empiric data that has already been introduced into scholarly circulation as new and freshly discovered, or purposeful neglect of proper references is prohibited.
* The copyrights for all contributions published in the journal Lithuanian Musicology belong to the Lithuanian Academy of Music and Theater; the authors are granted exclusive right to use their works independently of this collective publication.
* In case of special circumstances causing termination of the journal’s publication, the archive of the former issues is to be preserved and freely available on the Institute’s website.
* Publication of articles in the journal is free of charge. Authors are not entitled for any financial remuneration for their contributions. A free copy of a relevant issue is provided to all the contributors upon publication.
* Papers submitted for publication must meet the requirements of research publications and follow the editing principles specified in the Memo for Authors.
* All authors listed on a paper must have made substantive contributions to the research and writing of the paper.
* Authors must make sure that all data cited in the article are, to the best of their knowledge, real, accurate, and authentic.
* Authors must make sure that all sources of financial support for research connected to a paper are acknowledged on publication.
* Authors are required to take into account the reviewers’ comments regarding soundness of their statements and conclusions, the level of analysis, and other motivated reviewers’ opinions, and correct the indicated mistakes.
REVIEWING AND THE REVIEWER RESPONSIBILITIES
* Research articles submitted for publication in Lithuanian Musicology are reviewed using peer review method by at least two anonymous reviewers, selected by the Editorial Board from the specialists in the corresponding field. If the reviewers present contrary opinions regarding suitability of the article for publication, the Editorial Board appoints a third reviewer, and after receiving his/ her conclusions, makes the final decision.
* The process of reviewing is double-blind, i.e. the reviewers are not aware of the authors’ identity, and vice versa.
* The reviewers must disclose to the special editor or the Editorial Board any potential conflicts of interest regarding the papers they are asked to referee, including concerns related to funding or their personal objections to the material in question.
* Reviewers must alert the Editorial Board to any similar or related work already published, which is not cited in the paper in question.
* Reviewers should treat papers under review as confidential materials. They must not discuss, distribute, or in any way retain copies of papers reviewed.
* Editorial Board has final authority to accept or reject a submission.
* Editors are responsible for recognizing any potential conflict of interest with regard to a submission and should take appropriate action to ensure that these conflicts do not affect a submission’s acceptance or rejection.
* Editorial Board has to ensure an appropriate level of peer-reviewing and make unbiased decisions with no regard of possible inequity on the part of the reviewers, connected to the author’s gender, sexual orientation, religion, political views and ethnic / geographical background.
* Acceptance of a paper for publication implies confidence in and certainty (to the greatest extent possible) of the validity of the research contained therein.
* If a material error is discovered in a published paper, the Editorial Board has to ensure that a correction, retraction, or apology, as appropriate and feasible, is published promptly.
IDENTIFICATION OF UNETHICAL BEHAVIOUR
* Misconduct and unethical behaviour may be identified and brought to the attention of the editor and publisher at any time, by anyone.
* Misconduct and unethical behaviour may include, but need not be limited to, examples as outlined above.
* Whoever informs the editor or publisher of such conduct should provide sufficient information and evidence in order for an investigation to be initiated. All allegations should be taken seriously and treated in the same way, until a successful decision or conclusion is reached.
* Minor misconduct might be dealt with without the wider consultation with author given the chance to respond to any allegations.
* In case of serious misconduct the editor, in consultation with the publisher or Society as appropriate, should make the decision whether or not to involve the employers, either by examining the available evidence themselves or by further consultation with a limited number of experts.
* In case of misconduct, the author or reviewer should be informed where there appears to be a misunderstanding or misapplication of acceptable standards.
* The author or reviewer could be given a more strongly worded letter as a warning to future behavior.
* A formal notice detailing the misconduct could be published.
* A formal letter could be given to the head of the author’s or reviewer’s department or funding agency.
* Formal retraction or withdrawal of a publication from the journal, in conjunction with informing the head of the author or reviewer’s department, Abstracting & Indexing services and the readership of the publication.
* The case could be reported to a professional organisation or higher authority for further investigation and action.