Ethical Standards and Policies

General Policy Statement on NAMES Ethical Standards

The editorial policies of the journal have been established to encourage transparent, accurate, constructive ethical scholarly writing with the highest level of academic integrity possible. Towards that end, the following clearly outlines the responsibilities of each of the major stake holders in the publication process. Questions about this policy may be directed to the Editor-in-Chief of NAMES.

Responsibilities of the NAMES Editors

The Editor-in Chief

The Editor-in-Chief will ensure that the peer review process is unbiased, fair, constructive, transparent, and timely.  Manuscripts that are accepted for submission will be subjected to blind review by at least two members of the NAMES Editorial Board.  When necessary, the editor may also solicit expert assessments from non-Board members who are specialists in the area of onomastic research featured in the submission. The Editor-in-Chief will protect the confidentiality of all the material submitted to NAMES as well as all communications between all persons involved in the submission, review, and production process.  (See the NAMES Privacy Policy). In unusual circumstances such as cases involving dispute or complaint, the editor may share limited information with relevant members of the publication team and/or the Executive Council of the American Name Society as a part of the deliberative process.  The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for helping to ensure that the material published in NAMES meets the highest level of scientific integrity and thereby promotes the mission of the American Name Society as stipulated in Article II of the Society’s Constitution: “to encourage and promote the study of names […] and the publication of scholarly and popular works thereon.”  Towards that end, the Editor-in-Chief shall work to ensure that all material published in NAMES shall 1.) makes a substantive and lasting contribution to the scholarly investigation of names and naming; and 2.) increases the public understanding of and appreciation for the importance of names and naming. 

In cases of formal complaint or dispute, the Editor-in-Chief is responsible for helping to ensure that a fair, deliberative, and thorough investigation is conducted.  The ultimate aim of the investigation is to find a resolution that is in line with international standards of scholarship, the bylaws of the American Name Society, the policies of the publisher, and the laws regulating publication, plagiarism, and copyrights, and libel. The Editor-in-Chief is authorized to make minor editorial changes to manuscripts to correct errors in grammar and/or violations in the stylistic and formatting requirements of the journal. Should the Editor-in-Chief deem that major editorial changes are necessary, the Editor-in-Chief may halt the production process until such time that the corresponding author has satisfactorily implemented said alterations.  Material which contains offensive or derogatory content may be rejected in whole or in part, at the sole discretion of the Editor-in-Chief. The Editor-in-Chief has the final word in determining which articles, reports, obituaries, or notes will be published, be it online or in print.  The Editor-in-Chief, in consultation with the NAMES Book Review Editor, shall determine which media reviews shall be published in NAMES, both online and in print. The Editor-in-Chief has the sole responsibility for deciding the sequence and timing of publication for each piece accepted for publication. 

The Book Review Editor

The Book Review Editor has the sole and independent responsibility for determining which media reviews are to be solicited or accepted for publication in NAMES.  The Book Review Editor has the final word in determining which media shall be chosen for review in NAMES and assigning naming experts to provide an objective assessment of the media selected for review. The Book Review Editor is responsible for ensuring that the reviews to appear in NAMES are provided by established experts in the relevant area of onomastics.  The Book Review Editor has the final word in determining the appropriateness and acceptability of a review, both in terms of content and format. The Book Review Editor shall ensure that the review process is fair, transparent, respectful, and objective.   Media selected for review shall be chosen upon the basis of its adjudged relevance to and significance for the field of onomastics. The Book Review Editor has the complete discretion to reject, in whole or in part, any review submitted to NAMES for publication.  The Book Review Editor may

The Book Review Editor is authorized to make minor editorial changes to manuscripts for the purpose of correcting errors in grammar and/or violations in the stylistic and formatting requirements of the journal. Should the Book Review Editor deem that major editorial changes are necessary, the Book Review Editor may halt the production process until such time that the corresponding author has satisfactorily implemented said alterations. Material which contains offensive or derogatory content may be rejected, in whole or in part, at the sole discretion of the Book Review Editor.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

Members of the NAMES Editorial Review Board are responsible for providing objective, thorough, fair, respectful, polite, evidence-based, and timely assessments of manuscripts submitted for possible publication in NAMES.  Manuscripts are to be assessed on the basis of their potential contribution to the scholarly investigation of names and naming. Reviewers who have reason to belief that they are unable to satisfactorily meet the above-mentioned goals are expected to recuse themselves from providing an assessment. Reviewers are also expected to recuse themselves from assessing manuscripts that are outside of their sphere of competence or that pose a conflict of interest.  The assessments that reviewers provide are to be critical but respectful, evidence-based and devoid of personal prejudice. In addition to detailed written assessments of manuscripts accepted for review, reviewers are expected to select one of the following recommendations for the Editor-in-Chief’s deliberation: 1.) the manuscript should be accepted publication essentially as is; 2.) the manuscript should be accepted for publication pending minor revision; 3.) the manuscript should be considered for publication after major review; 4.) the manuscript should be rejected for publication because it is either unsuitable for NAMES or fails to meet the journal’s standards. In cases where a reviewer determines that a submission may be in danger of infringing upon the copyright of another piece of research, the reviewer is required to report the incident to the Editor-in-Chief or Book Review Editor and supply citations for the suspected source material. Reviewers are required to report any potential conflicts of interest.   Reviewers are also expected to report any potential ethical breaches to the NAMES Editorship.

 

Responsibilities of Authors

By submitting a manuscript to NAMES, authors indicate their understanding of and willingness to adhere to the publication standards and publishing regulations of the journal as stipulated in the Publication Policy and the NAMES Style Sheet. Failure to adhere to these regulations may be considered sufficient grounds for the immediate rejection of material(s) at any stage of the publication process. All materials submitted to NAMES must be the original work of the author(s) and not be under consideration for possible publication elsewhere.  Any and all forms of plagiarism, including self-plagiarism, are prohibited.  This prohibition extends to works that were previously or simultaneously published in a different language.  If discovered, acts of plagiarism will be considered sufficient and necessary grounds for immediate rejection of the relevant submission and/or removal of the publication from the NAMES store of scholarship. 

Authors are expected to adhere to the international standards of responsible, ethical, research.  Manuscripts that utilize the data, conceptual framework, graphic illustrations, or words—be they direct or paraphrased— are required to provide complete and accurate citations for the original works from which this intellectual good was taken. Authors are solely responsible for securing written permission right to use third party materials before manuscript submission.  Such material may not be used, in whole or in part, without citing the original source(s).  Authors who fail to obtain said permissions will be held solely and singularly responsible for any and all potential liabilities.  Authors must explicitly acknowledge all funding sources.  Authors who fail to acknowledge such funding or support will be held solely and singularly responsible for or any and all potential liabilities. Authors are expected to clearly differentiate personal opinion or conjecture from empirical scientific fact.  Authors may be expected to provide evidence of their research findings should questions from the NAMES editorship, readership, review board, and/or production team arise. 

The production team of NAMES strives to create a fair, ethical, constructive, respectful work environment.  For that reason, although the lively exchange of ideas is actively encouraged, disrespectful, injurious, and/or personally insulting communication will not be tolerated.  Violations of this institutional norm, at any point during the publication process, may be considered sufficient grounds for the immediate rejection of materials for future, current, or past publication. The expectation of courteous discourse applies to all professional correspondence with NAMES editorship, readership, editorship, readership, review board, and/or production team.  As a sister-society of the Linguistic Society of America (LSA), the American Name Society, and by extension NAMES, adheres to the LSA’s “Guidelines on Ethics for LSA Publications”  and work with “Human Subjects in Linguistic Research” .  NAMES also adheres to the Codes of Conduct specified in the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) https://publicationethics.org/files/2008%20Code%20of%20Conduct.pdf.
https://ans-names.pitt.edu/ans/Ethics
ans-names.pitt.edu
crawl=CC-MAIN-2021-49
24870
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:UXXKDYRZVD62IPG275PAUHH73I7VY4YN
<urn:uuid:f2d6ee1f-c71d-4916-8daf-d9589e4e70f3>
2021-12-05T05:02:24Z
136.142.171.84
text/html
sha1:2AR5WFNEOBB33YC7VETWO4UFNDREA3AD
<urn:uuid:802e83e8-5cb0-462c-81e7-c4a658d6a110>
https://ans-names.pitt.edu/ans/Ethics
response
<urn:uuid:82b41563-af83-41d2-bd63-52419ee871a8>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2021-49
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for November/December 2021
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-12
software: Apache Nutch 1.18 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.3-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: https://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/