Ethical Code

ETHICAL CODE OF RESEARCH CULTURE AND SCIENCE BOOK SERIES¹

Duties of the series Editors and the editorial board

Publication decisions. The RCASB series uses the scientific evaluation system known as peer-reviewing. The series Editors evaluate each book proposal to determine if the theme and content are of interest for the RCASB series. Once evaluated the book proposal, the series Editors select several reviewers in the Editorial Board based on their expertise in the particular field or topic. Each manuscript is reviewed by two reviewers in a process in which they remain anonymous (blind peer-review). In the case of two strongly contrasting revisions, a third reviewer is chosen. Reviewers are asked to evaluate the manuscript based on its originality, methodology, impact on research, and relevance to the professional practice. After collecting the reviewers' comments, the series Editors elaborate and send the publisher a summary judgment about the acceptance or not of the book. Responsible for the peer-reviewing process are the series Editors. The publication decision is taken within 30 days after the book proposal is sent by the author.

Fairness and equal opportunities. The RCASB series evaluates the proposed manuscript exclusively according to its content without discrimination regarding race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, ethnic origin, nationality, political orientation of the authors, or their academic affiliation.

Privacy and data conservation. The series Editors are committed to never disclosing any information on the submitted book to the RCASB series, except the author, the reviewers, and the publisher. The editorial staff preserves in a confidential database the results of the peer-review process.

Conflict of interest and transparency. A book proposal for the RCASB series by the members of the series Editors is equally submitted to the blind peer review. The series Editors are committed to never use in their research the content of the manuscript submitted for publication without the express consent of the author.

Quality. Every six months, the series Editors analize the peer review process results to assess whether to carry out some improvements to the process. The collaboration with a reviewer in the editorial board will be interrupted if there is a failure to comply with the prescribed evaluation procedure and the reviewers' duties reported below.

Plagiarism policy. Plagiarism is reported, by the series Editors, to the original author damaged by the plagiarism and to the affiliation body of the author who commits the plagiarism.

Duties of the reviewer

Purpose of the reviewer. Peer review is intended to assist the series Editors in making decisions on the manuscript submitted to the RCASB series. It can help the author to improve the final presentation of their manuscript.

Meeting deadlines. The reviewer who thinks to lack the expertise or to meet the deadline shall give notice as soon as possible to the series Editors.

Confidentiality. Any manuscript sent to the reviewer must be considered confidential, it cannot be used for personal scopes, and it is non-disclosable in any context.

Objectivity. The peer review should be done with the greatest possible objectivity and fairness. Any personal judgment about the author should be avoided. The reviewers are required to motivate their decisions through a standard form provided by the series Editors.

Conflict of interest and disclosure. Suppose there are conflicts of interest for cooperation relationship between the reviewer and the author. In that case, the reviewer must contact the series Editors and not accept the manuscript's assessment. The same must be done if there is a competitive situation.

Plagiarism policy. Plagiarism must be reported to the series Editors.

Duties of the author

Originality and plagiarism. The author is obliged to submit for publication unpublished and original manuscripts in their entirety and to quote all the texts used. It is admitted sending research already presented to the same publisher of the RCASB series and refused, provided that they are rewritten respecting the standards required by the RCASB series, and these manuscripts will be subjected again to a new peer-review. The series Editors reserves the right to verify the originality of the manuscript received by anti-plagiarism computer systems.

Multiple publications. The author is committed not to send the same item to more than one publisher. Proposing simultaneously the same text to more than a single publisher constitutes unethical behavior.

Authorship of the work. The corresponding author who submits a manuscript for the evaluation must ensure that they are listed as co-authors, all those who have made significant contributions to the design and conduct of research on which the manuscript is based.

Conflict of interest. By submitting a manuscript to the RCASB series, the author implicitly recognizes no conflicts of interest that may have affected the obtained results or the proposed conclusions. The author must also indicate whether there have been any financial sources of the proposed activities in the manuscript and any conflicts of interest.

Errors in the publications. Suppose an author finds a scientific error in a book already published. In that case, it is required to inform the RCASB series Editors, providing the best possible correction with an additional note in the format required.

Plagiarism policy. Plagiarism is prohibited; read our Plagiarism policy carefully.

 

¹This Ethical Code follows the guidelines of the COPE Committee on publication ethics.