Ethic declaration
PUBLICATION ETHICS AND MALPRACTICE STATEMENT
Anales de Filología Francesa follows the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity, published by ALLEA (European Federation of Academies of Sciences and Humanities) in 2017 (https://allea.org/code-of-conduct). Accordingly, Anales de Filología Francesa supports the efforts carried out by authors, editors, and copy editor to achieve a reliable research publication. In this regard, the journal will not accept any racist or sexist content, or any other material relating content that may violate the fundamental rights of individuals.
Anales de Filología Francesa aims to publish original research papers. Editors, authors, and assessors are encouraged to read carefully the specific ethical codes and to be aware of the responsibilities involved in participating as an editor, author or copy editor, in compliance with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
Author responsibilities
Articles submitted for publication must be the result of original and unpublished research. It is necessary to include the data obtained and analysed, as well as an objective discussion of the results. Likewise, adequate information must be provided so that any specialist can repeat the research undertaken and confirm or refute the interpretations defended in the research.
Authors must refrain from engaging in scientific misconduct and breaching publishing ethics.
Authors should present their results clearly, truthfully and without falsification or inappropriate data manipulation.
Authors must ensure the originality of the data and results reported in the research and verify that they have not been copied, invented, distorted, or manipulated.
Plagiarism in all forms, multiple or redundant publication, as well as data invention or manipulation constitute serious ethical failings and are considered scientific fraud.
Authors should provide appropriate authorship and acknowledgement. All authors must refrain from deliberately misrepresenting a scientist’s relationship with published work and they must have significantly contributed to the research.
Authors must report to the journal in case they have a direct or indirect conflict of interest with editors or the Editorial Board.
Submission of an article implies that the work described has not been published previously, whether as an article or as a chapter, and that it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere.
If an author detects a serious error in an article, it is obligatory to inform the journal as soon as possible, in order to modify the article, withdraw it, retract it or publish a correction or erratum.
In case the Editorial Board detects an error, the author must demonstrate his or her work is accurate.
Authors are under obligation, for all submitted articles, to participate in a peer-review process and to follow the publication standards.
Editor responsibilities
The Editorial Board will manage the proposed works for publication impartially. Moreover, the intellectual independence of the authors is absolutely guaranteed, as well as the right of reply in case of negative evaluations.
The Editorial Board members will maintain the confidentiality of the submitted texts and their content. The title and authorship will only be allowed to be published once they have been accepted for publication.
Members of the Editorial Board may not use data, arguments or interpretations contained in unpublished works for their own research, unless with the written consent of the author(s).
Publication decision
All contributions will be initially assessed by the Editorial Board for suitability for the journal. The Editorial Board is solely responsible for selecting, processing, and deciding which of the articles submitted fulfil the editorial objectives of the journal. Papers deemed suitable are then typically sent to a minimum of two independent expert reviewers to assess the scientific quality of the paper.
The decision to publish an article will depend on its importance to researchers, professionals, and potential readers. It is essential that editors make impartial decisions irrespective of commercial considerations.
Editors in charge of the final article decisions should withdraw from editorial decisions in case of conflicts of interest or relationships that may raise potential issues. The publication decision will be attributed to an editor who does not have any conflicts of interest and who can carry out a proper verification of the article.
Peer review
The Editorial Board will ensure research papers are being evaluated by a minimum of two independent expert reviewers who fairly and impartially assess the scientific quality of the paper.
Reviewed articles are treated confidentially by the Editorial Board, members of the international scientific committee and reviewers.
The Editorial Board values the contribution of those who collaborate in the evaluation of papers submitted to the journal. However, the Editorial Board will disregard those who make poor quality, incorrect, disrespectful, or unjustifiably late assessments in order to ensure the quality of the journal.
Identifying and preventing misconduct
Under any circumstances shall members of the Editorial Board and the Scientific Committee encourage or permit misconduct of any kind. The members of the Editorial Board will try to prevent misconduct by informing authors and reviewers of the required ethical behaviour.
Reviewers and Editorial Board members are required to be aware of misconduct. In addition, they are expected to identify documents where research misconduct of any kind has occurred or appears to have occurred, and to handle complaints accordingly.
In case of misconduct, the journal editor is responsible for addressing the problem with the assistance and advice of Editorial Board members, peer reviewers and professionals in the field. Consequently, the problem will be documented. All factual questions should be reported: who, what, when, when, where, why. All relevant documents, particularly the articles, must be preserved.
If misconduct has occurred or appears to have occurred, or in the case of required corrections, the Editorial Board will address the cases in accordance with the recommendations of the COPE.
Great care will be taken to distinguish cases of honest human error from deliberate intent to defraud.
The Editorial Board will consider withdrawing a publication in case of misconduct, or issuing a notice in case of inconclusive evidence, or requesting a correction.
Reviewer responsibilities
All reviewers must know and follow the Editorial policy and the Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement.
The journal requires potential reviewers to have scientific expertise or significant work experience in a relevant field. They must have recently conducted research and/or work and have acquired recognized expertise by their peers. Potential reviewers should provide personal and professional information which is accurate, and which gives a fair representation of their expertise.
All reviewers must likewise withdraw if they know they are unqualified to evaluate an article, if they feel their evaluation of the material will not be objective, or if they understand themselves to be in a conflict of interest.
Los evaluadores deben indicar los trabajos publicados relevantes que no se citan en el material revisado. Si es necesario, el director o el editor pueden emitir una solicitud de corrección a este efecto.
Se solicita a los evaluadores que identifiquen los documentos en los que haya ocurrido o parezca que ha ocurrido una mala conducta de investigación e informen al comité editorial, que tratará cada caso en consecuencia.
Reviewers are asked to identify possible cases of research misconduct and inform the Editorial board, which will proceed accordingly.
Conflict of interest
Members of the Editorial Board and reviewers shall withdraw in any case of conflict of interest concerning an author or authors, or the content of a manuscript to be evaluated. It is essential to avoid all conflict of interest between authors, reviewers, and members of the Editorial Board.
The editors and reviewers should withdraw from making decisions when:
- There is a direct-reporting relationship between an author and a reviewer.
- There is recent, significant professional collaboration between reviewers and authors.
- An editor or reviewer is a collaborator on the project that is being submitted.
- The editor or reviewer has a financial interest in a company or competing company with a financial interest in the submission.
- The editor or reviewer believes that he or she cannot be objective, whether for personal reasons or due to a financial interest not otherwise covered in the policy.
