The Code of conduct of the journal “RicercAzione” responds and complies with current guidelines in line with the "Committee on Publication Ethics" (COPE). This is the commitment to educate and support editors, publishers, universities, research institutes, and all those involved in publication ethics. The management of the journal is in line with the COPE’s recommendations to prevent negligence and to ensure good practice in the ethical process of the publication. It is expected that all the parties involved - Publishers, Editors, Authors, Referees - know and share the following ethical principles.
Duties of publishers
Publication's decisions
Publishers and editors are responsible for the selection process and the publication of articles submitted to the journal.
With reference to the “Research Section”, the selection process is based on the double-blind peer review process accomplished by two expert referees.
Publishers will ensure that the appropriate and qualified referees are selected for each submission to guarantee the quality of the contributions and to assure that materials submitted to the journal remain confidential while under review.
Publishers supervise referee's work from start to finish. Before sending a contribution for the review, publishers carry out the initial check on it. They will take all reasonable steps to ensure the quality of the published material and to ensure a fair, unbiased, and timely peer review process.
Contributions deemed ineligible by the publishers may be rejected without a review process by the referees. Contributions considered eligible are anonymized by publishers and sent to the referees for their evaluation.
Non-discrimination & Fairness Policy
Publishers, editors, and referees evaluate the submitted contributions on the basis of their contents. Discrimination on grounds of their gender, sexual orientation, political or religious beliefs, ethnic or geographical origin of the authors.
Editorial confidentiality, conflict of interest and prohibition of use or disclosure
Publishers, referees, and editors commit to not disclose information about the submitted contributions for publication to anyone other than the authors, reviewers, and printer. They undertake not to use the contents of the contributions for their own research without the express written consent of the author.
Duties of authors
Scientific originality
The author must stipulate that the contribution submitted for evaluation is unpublished, scientifically original, and not simultaneously submitted to other journals, volumes, or periodicals. If the contribution is subsequently submitted in other periodicals or volumes, the journal "RicercAzione" must be informed and give consent, while explicitly referencing the publication in it.
The author is also required to adequately cite any references to the works or works of other individuals or organizations, following the editorial guidelines specified for publication in the Journal, ensuring that the work and/or words of other Authors are appropriately paraphrased or quoted with proper acknowledgment of the sources.
The authors are required to provide any necessary authorisation to reproduce texts, data, figures, images, or videos. The reutilization of these contents without IPRASE’s permission is considered plagiarism.
Additions to the contributions
Publishers may request authors to make changes and corrections, even following the anonymous evaluation by referees. Authors are required to adequately address the referees' comments in terms of changes or corrections of the contributions. If authors refuse to comply without providing reasonable justifications, the contribution may not be accepted for publication.
Publishers may also do editorial changes after the first drafts' review to ensure a consistent publishing style. This may include changes to grammar, spelling, punctuation, and formatting.
Authorship
All those who have made a significant contribution should be listed as co-authors.
If there are other individuals who have participated in substantial aspects of the research project, they should be recognised and listed as contributors in the acknowledgements.
The corresponding author must ensure that all relevant co-authors are included in the contribution, that they have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and that they agree to its submission for publication.
Conflict of interest
All authors are required to state explicitly that there are no conflicts of interest which might have affected the results obtained or the interpretations proposed. Authors must also indicate any funding bodies for the research and/or the project from which the article is derived.
Defamation
The journal is committed to upholding the right to freedom of expression, while also ensuring that all contributions are respectful and do not contain any offensive or defamatory language. We will not accept any contributions that could be seen as offensive or inflammatory, or that could be seen as an attack on an individual or organisation.
Errors correction or inaccuracies
The author must promptly communicate any errors and/or inaccuracies to the editors and provide them with any information in order to report the required corrections.
Publication fees
The Journal does not require any financial contribution from the authors, neither for the submission of proposals nor for their processing towards publication.
Duties of the refeeres
Contribution to the editorial decision
The double-blind peer-review process supports the editors in making decisions about the articles submitted and provides authors with the opportunity to improve their contributions.
Complying with the times limits
A referee who does not feel adequate or sufficiently qualified for the requested task or is unable to complete the review within the specified timeframe must notify the journal's editors as soon as possible.
Confidentiality
Every contribution assigned for review is confidential. The contributions can be discussed only with the authorisation of editors.
Accuracy and objectivity
The review process must be conducted in an accurate and objective manner.
Referees are requested to provide adequate and well-documented justifications for their evaluations of the submitted contribution, offering an impartial judgment on its content and quality while respecting the intellectual independence of the authors. Comments should be technically well-formulated and should not be construed as ideologically driven criticism or contain personal scientific or cultural assumptions. Whenever possible, each statement, observation, or argument should be accompanied by a corresponding citation and/or supporting documentation.
Bibliographic citation
Referees undertake to accurately indicate the bibliographical references of fundamental works that may have been overlooked by the author.
The Referees are also required to report to the editors any similarities or overlaps of the contribution with other works known to them and any cases where they believe the contribution contains plagiarism or copyright violations.
Referees should draw the attention of Editors to any concerns they may have regarding the ethical acceptability of the research or research experience reported in the contribution.
Conflict of interests and disclosure
Confidential information or indications obtained during the review process must be considered confidential and may not be used for personal purpose.
Referees should not accept for review contributions for which there is a conflict of interest due to previous collaborative or competitive relationships with the author and/or the institution for which he/she works.