Navegación – Mapa del sitio

Ethics and responsabilities

Publication ethics

The authors' obligations in relation to research ethics are specified in the “recommendations to authors”. The editorial board verifies that the proposed papers meet these requirements. On submission, each paper received is reviewed from this point of view. The questions that this first review can raise are dealt with in the editorial office. Details are requested from the author if necessary.

The requested reviewers commit to disclose potential conflicts of interest they may be subject to by this evaluation. They also report non-conformance to the scientific ethics they may observe (plagiarism, falsification, etc.) Remarks/comments are received and processed by the Drafting Group. If confirmed, an open debate with the author takes place. Additional data or information may be requested for this purpose.

After publication, any requests for correction or even withdrawal of a paper for reasons of non-compliance with research ethics may be sent at any time to the drafting group of the journal. These requests are reviewed on the basis of the factual information provided. If the committee considers the application admissible, the author's point of view is sought. The decision to request a correction from the author, or the choice to withdraw the article, belongs to the Drafting Group.

Evaluation procedure

Principles

Image 10000201000000140000001A4553913A.png

Reviewers are encouraged to produce a rigorous, but benevolent review. Rigorous evaluation, in the sense that the criticisms formulated refer to the content of the text on the one hand, and to the standards of a demanding research on the other hand. Benevolent evaluation, in the sense that the work and the person of the author are respected regardless of the criticism. In the case of acceptance with reservations, the formulation of these must be able to lead the author to a significant improvement of the text. In the case of a rejection, the critics must be able to support the epistemological and methodological reflection of the author in the perspective of his future work

Image 10000201000000140000001A4553913A.png

Double-blind and Peer-reviewed

Image 10000201000000140000001A4553913A.png

At the request of one of the two parties (author or reviewers) and subject to acceptance by all actors, anonymity can be lifted. In this case, the authors are put in contact with their evaluators

Image 10000201000000140000001A4553913A.png

The Drafting Group solicits an evaluator considered as a specific expert on the question dealt with and an evaluator considered as a more generic connoisseur of the field considered

Image 10000201000000140000001A4553913A.png

Any "D" rated evaluation by one of the reviewers results in the refusal of the article

Image 10000201000000140000001A4553913A.png

Reviewers are invited to mention any conflict of interest with the presumed author

Image 10000201000000140000001A4553913A.png

Reviewers are invited to respect the anonymous nature of the evaluation

Image 10000201000000140000001A4553913A.png

Proceedings

The evaluation phase is summarized as follows:

Image 10000000000007C00000057260FC410D.png

The evaluation file:

Image 10000201000000140000001A4553913A.png

Is formed after each reading

Image 10000201000000140000001A4553913A.png

Is sent to the author and to the reviewers

It includes:

Image 10000201000000140000001A4553913A.png

A synthesis produced by the Drafting Group

Image 10000201000000140000001A4553913A.png

The evaluation form of each reviewer

Image 10000201000000140000001A4553913A.png

A detailed opinion

Image 10000201000000140000001A4553913A.png

The paper annotated by each reviewer, whenever possible

Responsibilities

Image 10000201000000140000001A4553913A.png

Authors must have contributed significantly to the research findings set out in the paper

Image 10000201000000140000001A4553913A.png

The authors undertake that their article has not already been published as is

Image 10000201000000140000001A4553913A.png

The authors agree to be part of the potential reviewers of papers submitted for review

Image 10000201000000140000001A4553913A.png

The general principles in relation to research ethics are specified at the top of this document