The PaleoAnthropology journal is a non-profit publication.
PaleoAnthropology and its Publishers (the Paleoanthropology Society and the European Society for the Study of Human Evolution) are committed to safeguarding the scholarly record and to ethical principles in publishing.
The editors are solely and independently responsible for decisions about which articles submitted to the journal should be published, based on the journal’s scope, publication guidelines and reviewer recommendations.
The editors will ensure that the peer review process is fair, unbiased, and timely. Research articles will be reviewed by at least two external, independent reviewers, selected based on their suitable expertise, taking into account the need for diverse representation.
The editors will assess submitted papers without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors. All journal communications will use the PaleoAnthropology electronic submission system to ensure transparency.
The editors will not attempt to influence the journal’s ranking by artificially increasing any journal metric.
The editors will protect the confidentiality of all materials submitted to the journal, as well as all communications with reviewers, unless otherwise agreed with the authors and reviewers in question. Unpublished materials from a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without written permission from the author.
The editors will not be involved in decisions about papers which they have themselves authored or co-authored, or which have been written by family members or close colleagues. Any such submission will be subject to all of the journal’s usual procedures, and peer review will be handled independently of the relevant author/editor and their research groups.
The editors will work to safeguard the integrity of the PaleoAnthropology published record by reviewing and evaluating reported claims of or suspected misconduct (research, publication, reviewer and editorial) together with the Societies. If presented with convincing evidence of misconduct the editors will arrange for the prompt publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other correction, as deemed appropriate, in coordination with the Societies.
Any invited reviewer who feels unqualified to review a manuscript or knows that it will be impossible to provide a review promptly should notify the editor and decline the invitation to review.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential. Unpublished materials included in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the written permission of the author.
A reviewer should be alert to potential ethical issues and bring any such issues to the attention of the editor. These include any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published article, of which the reviewer has personal knowledge. Any statements to this effect should be accompanied by the relevant citations.
Reviews should be objective. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments and be aware of any personal bias they may have. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate and not acceptable.
Reviewers with potential conflicts of interest (e.g., competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors or institutions) should consult the editors before accepting the invitation to review.
Authors should present an accurate account of the work performed and an objective discussion of the work’s significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately, with sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
Authors are required to provide a data availability statement, in accordance with open data principles. Additionally, they may be asked to provide the datasets themselves for the purposes of editorial review.
The authors are responsible for ensuring the originality of their work, and that they have appropriately cited or quoted the work and/or words of others where relevant and permission has been obtained where necessary.
Proper acknowledgement of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have influenced the submitted work and that give the work appropriate context within the scholarly record.
Information obtained privately (e.g. conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties) cannot be used unless there is explicit, written permission from the source. Plagiarism in any form constitutes unethical behaviour and is not acceptable.
An author should not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal of primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time constitutes unethical behaviour and is not acceptable.
Information obtained confidentially (e.g., when reviewing papers or grant proposals), must not be used, unless there is explicit written permission from the author of the work.
Authors should carefully consider the list and order of authors. Anyone who made substantial contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study should be listed as a co-author. Any others who have participated in substantive aspects of the paper should be recognised in the Acknowledgements. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors are included and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication. Authors take collective responsibility for the work.
Appropriate permissions for access to any archaeological, paleontological or other samples should be listed in the Acknowledgments.
All sources of financial support for the conduct of the research and/or preparation of the article should be disclosed in the Acknowledgments.
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it is the author’s obligation to notify the editors promptly and cooperate with them to retract or correct the paper, if the editors deem it necessary. If the editors or the publishers learn from a third party that a published work contains an error, it is the obligation of the author to cooperate with the editors, including providing evidence to the editor where requested.
It is not acceptable to enhance, obscure, move, remove, or introduce a specific feature within an image. Adjustments of brightness, contrast, or color balance are acceptable as long as they do not obscure or eliminate any information present in the original image. Manipulating images for improved clarity is acceptable, but manipulation for other purposes is not acceptable.