PUBLICATION ETHICS

ETHICAL STATEMENT AND GUIDE TO GOOD PRACTICE

Based on the recommendations of Elsevier and the COPE Guide or Code of Good Practice for Publication Editors established by the PUBLICATIONS ETHICS COMMITTEE.

  1. Editorial Board

The Editorial Board of the journal RIDROM is committed to the scientific community to ensure compliance with the Code of Good Practice (COPE Guide), concerning the ethics and quality of its publications. And they demand that the actions of all parties involved in the procedure of editing and publication of the journal (authors, reviewers and editors of the journal) conform to the standards of ethical behaviour.

The composition of the RIDROM Editorial Team is available and accessible on the journal's website under About, section EDITORIAL TEAM. It consists of an Editorial Board with an editorial, sub-editorial and scientific secretariat, and also has the support and advice of a Scientific Advisory Board. All members of both the Editorial Board and the Scientific Advisory Board are internationally recognised experts in the field of Roman law.

The Editorial Board guarantees impartiality in the process of managing and selecting articles, as well as the intellectual independence of the authors of the articles submitted for publication in RIDROM. All persons involved in the publication procedure must maintain confidentiality, especially the anonymity of the authors until the article has been published or definitively rejected.

The Editorial Board may accept or reject a text received for publication, or require its correction before publication, always taking into account the double-blind peer-review procedure. It will take measures to identify and prevent the publication of papers in which plagiarism, manipulation of citations, falsification/fabrication of data and inappropriate use of Artificial Intelligence in the preparation of the manuscript, among others, have occurred. It will reject outright any text that has been plagiarised from another author, as it is considered the most serious breach of scientific ethics, and those in which the aforementioned research misconduct is detected, applying the COPE guidelines.

And if despite these precautions taken, any misconduct or malpractice has taken place, also concerning the scientific research work carried out by the authors, the Editorial Board may, as soon as it becomes aware of it, demand a correction, or a retraction or an apology from the author of the publication, or do so itself, or even remove any existing publication.  

And if, despite these precautions taken, any misconduct or malpractice has taken place, also in relation to the scientific research work carried out by the authors, the Editorial Board may, as soon as it becomes aware of it, demand a correction, or a retraction or an apology from the author of the publication, or do so itself, or even remove any existing publication.

Throughout the publication process, the Editorial Board shall respect full equality between persons, without distinction of any kind on grounds of race, sex, religion or opinion or any other personal or social condition or circumstance of the authors.

The Editorial Board shall ensure that full parity between men and women is respected throughout the editing and publication process, including in the composition of the Editorial Board itself, as well as in the composition of the Scientific Advisory Committee.

The journal RIDROM does not charge or require any fee or amount for the processing or publication of manuscripts, as it is an open-access journal and free of fees or charges.

The address for contacting the Editorial Board is: clrendo@uniovi.es

2. Authors and responsibility

The processing of texts submitted for publication only takes place when the research work is original, i.e.  when the content has not been plagiarised from a publication by another author.

All authors must have made a significant contribution to the research, and are obliged to provide a list of bibliographical references, and a correct, real and true citation of the sources and scientific material used. If authors use the word or words of others, they must cite or quote appropriately. They must also declare whether they have obtained special funding for their research work.

All authors are obliged to follow the instructions published by RIDROM in the PUBLICATION RULES section, before accepting peer review of their article, and to provide retractions or corrections of any errors or mistakes detected if the Editorial Board so requires in writing.

If an author discovers a major error or inaccuracy in one of his or her published papers, it is the author's obligation to notify the journal's management or editor immediately and to cooperate in retracting or correcting the paper.

If the editorial team detects that a published paper contains a major error, it may ask the author to retract or correct the paper immediately.

Originality, proofreading and errors are the sole responsibility of the authors themselves.

3. Peer review procedure

 All articles contained in RIDROM are subject to peer review. After checking compliance with the formal requirements, a report is requested from two reviewers, who are not members of the RIDROM Editorial Board, for each manuscript. Reviewers from outside the RIDROM Editorial Board may be members of the Scientific Advisory Board, or external experts in Roman Law and/or experts in current law, who have published an article in a previous issue.

The review will be carried out using the "double-blind" system, according to which the reviewers do not know the identity of the authors, and the author does not know the identity of the reviewer. The Editorial Board of RIDROM appoints the two external advisors, always guaranteeing the absence of conflicts of interest between them and the authors, mainly by not revealing the identity of those involved, but also by avoiding appointing reviewers who might have a personal or professional interest in the promotion of the author in question.

The reviewers must issue a reasoned report, especially in the case of refusal to publish the article, mentioning any mistakes or errors, omission of the most recent bibliography, lack of precision in the citation of Roman law sources, or defective understanding or translation of the Latin.

Reviewers must advise the editor of any substantial similarities or overlaps between the manuscript under review and any other published work of which they have personal knowledge.

The journal administrator will communicate to the authors the reasoned result of the evaluation by the OJS platform, including the anonymous reviewers' reports. If the manuscript has been accepted with modifications, the authors must resubmit a new version of the article according to the demands and suggestions of the external reviewers. Articles with important corrections may be sent to new reviewers appointed by the editorial board or reviewed by a member of the editorial board.

In the event of disagreement between the reviewers' reports, the Editorial Board will decide by majority vote whether to publish or reject the article and, if so, in which edition of the journal.

The decision is communicated to the author within three months of receipt of the manuscript, and both the date of submission and the date of acceptance is archived. In case of rejection of the manuscript, the reasons and scientific explanations will also be communicated to the author, who has the right to reply.

 4. Obligations of reviewers

Reviewers must respect the confidentiality and anonymity of the authors and are obliged to report any malpractice of which they become aware, especially cases of plagiarism or false citations.

None of the persons involved in the publication procedure and, in particular, in the review procedure, is allowed to use, for their benefit, arguments or scientific interpretations contained in articles not yet published, unless there is written authorisation from the author himself/herself.

Reviewers must issue clear reports based on scientific arguments, not on personal opinions. And in the review of original articles, they must maintain full objectivity and, therefore, refrain from any kind of conflict of interest with the authors (such as pecuniary interests, work or institutional relationships, or even friendship or enmity).

5. Publication ethics and editorial policies on gender equality

  The Editorial Board and the members of the Advisory Board are fully committed to the observation and implementation of gender equality policies. In the appointment of members of the Editorial Board and the Advisory Board, as well as in the appointment of reviewers for each of the articles, gender parity will be respected. Likewise, an attempt will be made to impose maximum gender parity among the authors of articles in each issue of the journal.

6. Anti-plagiarism policy.

In order to guarantee the academic integrity of all manuscripts, this journal uses the anti-plagiarism software provided by the University of Oviedo. This policy will allow the detection of coincidences and similarities between the texts submitted for publication and those previously published in other sources, detecting misquotations or plagiarism. If plagiarism is detected, the manuscript will be discarded for publication.