Articles submitted to the journal must reflect the original and new research and further academic discussions on the topics of Music in Art‘s concern. It is crucially important that scholarship submitted for the publication is accurate and trustworthy. RCMI is committed to academic excellence, but as the publisher of the journal adopts a neutral position on issues treated in the journal. Articles are considered and accepted solely on their academic merit and without commercial influence.

RCMI is committed to meeting and upholding standards of ethical behavior at all stages of the publication process. In this process RCMI follows the industry standards, such as the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). All articles are peer-reviewed by experts in the field.

1. Ethical expectations

Editor’s responsibilities

Editor is solely and independently responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal shall be published. In making the decision about publications of an article, the editor will be guided by the recommendation of the peer-reviewer and advice of the Board of Advisory Editors.
Editor acts in a balanced, objective and fair way, without discrimination on grounds of gender, sexual orientation, religious or political beliefs, ethnic or geographical origin of the authors.
Editor will follow reasonable procedures in the event of complaints of an ethical or conflict nature. To give authors a reasonable opportunity to respond to any complaints. All complaints will be investigated no matter when the original publication was approved. Documentation associated with any such complaints is being retained.

Responsibilities of the Board of Advisory Editors

Music in Art has international Board of Advisory Editors. Members of the board are recognized experts in the field of musicology and art history. Their duty is to assist the editor in making editorial decisions.

Reviewers’ responsibilities

All of content published in Music in Art is subject to peer-review.
Peer-reviewers are assisting in improving the quality of the published paper by reviewing its manuscript objectively and in a timely manner. Their judgments and findings should be objective.
Reviewers shell maintain the confidentiality of any information supplied by the editor or author. They will not retain or copy the manuscript.
Reviewers will alert the editor to any published or submitted content that is substantially similar to that under review.
Reviewers shell be aware of any potential conflicts of interest (financial, institutional, collaborative or other relationships between the reviewer and author) and to alert the editor to these, if necessary withdrawing their services for that manuscript.

Authors’ responsibilities

To maintain accurate records of data associated with their submitted manuscript, and to supply or provide access to these data, on reasonable request. To confirm/assert that the manuscript as submitted is not under consideration or accepted for publication elsewhere. Where portions of the content overlap with published or submitted content, to acknowledge and cite those sources. Additionally, to provide the editor with a copy of any submitted manuscript that might contain overlapping or closely related content. For a clarification, Music in Art does not accept articles which have been published elsewhere, or allows the content that has appeared in Music in Art to be reprinted in another journal.
To confirm that all the work in the submitted manuscript is original and to acknowledge and cite content reproduced from other sources.
To obtain permission for the publication for all visual material that is reproduced within the article, as well as the permission to reproduce any other content adopted from other sources.
Sources of funding supporting the research have to be clearly indicated.
Authors should ensure that any studies involving human or animal subjects conform to national, local and institutional laws and requirements (e.g. WMA Declaration of Helsinki, NIH Policy on Use of Laboratory Animals, EU Directive on Use of Animals) and confirm that approval has been sought and obtained where appropriate. Authors should obtain express permission from human subjects and respect their privacy.
To declare any potential conflicts of interest (e.g., where the author has a competing interest—real or apparent—that could be considered or viewed as exerting an undue influence on his or her duties at any stage during the publication process).
To notify promptly the journal editor or publisher if a significant error in their publication is identified. To cooperate with the editor and publisher to publish an erratum, addendum, corrigendum notice, or to retract the paper, where this is deemed necessary.

2. Procedures for dealing with unethical behavior

Identification of unethical behavior

Misconduct and unethical behavior may be identified and brought to the attention of the editor and publisher at any time, by anyone.
Whoever informs the editor or publisher of a misconduct should provide sufficient information and evidence in order for an investigation to be initiated. All allegations will be taken seriously and treated in the same way, until a successful decision or conclusion is reached.

Investigation

An initial decision should be taken by the editor, who will consult with the Board of Advisory Editors, if appropriate.
Evidence should be gathered, while avoiding spreading any allegations beyond those who need to know.

Minor breaches

Minor misconduct might be dealt with without the need to consult more widely. The author will be given an opportunity to respond to any allegations.

Serious breaches

Serious misconduct might require that the employers of the accused be notified. The editor, in consultation with the Board of Advisory Editors will make the decision whether or not to involve the employers, either by examining the available evidence or by further confidential consultation with a limited number of experts.

Outcomes

Informing or educating the author or reviewer in the case of a misunderstanding or misapplication of acceptable standards.
A more strongly worded letter to the author or reviewer covering the misconduct and as a warning to future behavior.
Publication of a formal notice or an editorial detailing the misconduct.
A formal letter to the head of the author’s or reviewer’s department or funding agency.
Retraction or withdrawal of a publication from the journal and its online distribution (JSTOR & EBSCO), in conjunction with informing the head of the author or reviewer’s department, Abstracting & Indexing services and the readership of the publication.
Imposition of a formal embargo on contributions from an individual for a defined period.
Reporting the case and outcome to a professional organisation or higher authority for further investigation and action.