Code of ethics applicable to drafting committees and editorial boards of academic journals offered on Cairn.info
Scientific Quality of the Journal
The editorial board is responsible for all the contents published in the journal and seeks to ensure the scientific quality of the journal. It ensures a regular turnover in the composition of its board of reviewers and scientific committee as well as in its own membership with a view to guaranteeing professional rigor. It tracks and mentions the affiliations of the members of the editorial board, the international reading committee and the scientific committee on the website of the journal.
Freedom of expression and scientific debate
The editorial board selects the articles in an impartial manner. It particularly pays attention to articles that contribute to the scientific debate. Any article offering relevant criticism of an article published in the journal can be submitted. Authors have a right of reply to criticism of their article(s).
Relationship with the readers
The origin of the funding for the research presented in the journal is mentioned. The editorial board commits to answering reader complaints.
Relationship with the authors
Articles are selected purely based on their intellectual or scientific merit, without any discrimination on the ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religion, nationality, university affiliation or political opinion of the author. When making decisions, the editorial board takes into account all legal requirements in terms of slander, copyright violations and plagiarism. The procedure to submit an article to the journal is outlined in a document available on the website of the journal and updated regularly. Any costs associated to the publication of an article are mentioned explicitly in said document.
Relationship with the reviewers
The reviewers’ responsibilities are defined in a document available on the website of the journal and updated regularly. The editorial board guarantees the anonymity of the reviewers.
Commercial/political conflicts of interest
Articles are selected based on their academic interest to the readers and not on the commercial/political benefits they can bring to the journal. The editorial board ensures the journal’s independence vis-à-vis its publisher and its owner(s). If the journal contains advertisements, they are clearly marked as such
Actions that go against the ethics of the publication
The editorial board seeks to identify and prevent any action deemed to go against the ethics of the publication. It is committed to investigate any complaint made against the journal, according to the procedure described below. The author has a right of reply to a complaint. The editorial board should always be prepared to publish corrections, apologies or clarifications whenever they are called for.
Procedure followed in the event of a breach of ethics of the publication
Anyone can file a complaint for breach of ethics of the publication to the editorial board of the journal. The person filing the complaint must provide supporting elements. Any complaint is to be taken seriously by the editorial board and must be treated until conclusion. Any complaint will be handled, no matter its date of publication. The supporting elements submitted as part of a complaint must be kept and archived by the editorial board. Measures to could be implemented in the event of a complaint include:
- Interview with the author of the article, if the complaint stems from a misunderstanding of the code of ethics of the journal or the publication guidelines
- Written notification sent to the author, providing details about the alleged breach of ethics of the publication. This notification serves as a first warning.
- Written notification sent to the institution/organization where the author is employed
- Publication of an editorial in the journal, informing the readers about the procedure
- Withdrawal of the article from the journal and indexes where it might be featured
- Ban on any new articles written by the author, duration to be determined
- Refer to an outside organization with authority to deal with the complaint
Code of ethics applicable to reviewers of academic journals
Reviewers are selected based on their scientific and intellectual expertise. They are tasked with the evaluation of the manuscripts solely on their contents, without consideration for the ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religion, nationality, university affiliation or political opinion of the author. Judgments should be objective. Reviewers are required to flag all articles that are similar, to some degree, to the article submitted to the journal. Reviewers should point out relevant published work which is not yet cited.
Conflict of Interest
Editorial board members and reviewers must recuse themselves if there is a conflict of interest with an author or with the content of the manuscript to be reviewed. Furthermore, reviewers who know that they are not qualified to review a manuscript or that they will be unable to do so within a reasonable period of time are required to inform the editorial board of this fact and to recuse themselves.
Manuscripts received for review are treated confidentially. No information about a manuscript submitted to a journal may be disclosed to anyone other than the author, potential reviewers, and in some cases the publisher. Reviewers will not keep or copy the manuscripts they receive for evaluation.
The data presented in the submitted articles may not be used prior to publication in the research of an editorial board member or reviewer without the author’s express written consent.
With the exception of potential book reviews and the papers publishers in the “conjoinctures section”, which are evaluated by the review editor (and discussed with members of the editorial board), articles submitted to the journal are reviewed according to the following methods :
- Double-blind review: The author does not know the identity of the reviewers and the reviewers do not know the identity of the author. There are at least two (or three) reviewers for each article.
In the event of doubts or diverging evaluations among the reviewers, additional opinions may be sought by the editorial board. Articles that would be contrary to the journal’s editorial policy may be rejected by the editorial board without an evaluation report being supplied. Based on the reviewers’ reports, the editorial board takes one of the following three decisions within a reasonable period of time following receipt of the manuscript :
- Acceptance of the manuscript as submitted to the journal;
- Acceptance subject to modifications.
In the latter case, the editorial board will make a final decision based on whether or not the author adopted the suggestions and comments provided by the reviewers. Any manuscript that is accepted either when first submitted or following modifications by the author is subject to editing conducted in collaboration with the author. When reaching a decision, the editorial board considers legal requirements in terms of defamation, copyright violation, and plagiarism.
Code of ethics applicable to authors
Originality and Plagiarism
Authors must vouchsafe for the originality of their article and may not publish any work that might in any way whatsoever constitute infringement as defined by the Intellectual Property Code. False or deliberately inaccurate statements constitute behavior contrary to the ethics of scientific publication and are therefore unacceptable.
Multiple, Redundant, and Simultaneous Publications
Authors undertake not to submit work previously published in another journal or an original article based exclusively on work already published elsewhere. Authors also undertake not to submit manuscripts to multiple journals simultaneously.
Any citation (or use of other authors’ work) must be identified as such and be accompanied by appropriate references presented in accordance with the journal’s procedures. Should authors wish to refer to information obtained privately (conversation, correspondence), they should do everything possible to obtain authorization to do so from those identified as the source of this information.
The list of co-authors must be limited to those who made a significant contribution to the conception, conduct, or interpretation of the research presented in the manuscript submitted to the journal or to the drafting of that manuscript. All authors along with their affiliation should be listed in alphabetical order or according to their level of involvement in conducting the research or drafting the document. The corresponding author must ensure that only the appropriate co-authors are listed and that all co-authors agreed to the manuscript being submitted for publication after having seen and approved the final version of their contribution..
Authors undertake not to violate the rules of scientific debate in the articles they submit or make defamatory statements that might be interpreted as impugning the reputation of a third party.
Conflict of Interest
Authors must declare any potential, professional, or financial conflict of interest. All sources of non-public funding used in the research presented in the submission must be explicitly named.
Authors who discover a major error or inaccuracy in their work after publication are required to report this promptly to the journal’s editorial board and to cooperate with it in publishing an erratum or, if necessary, announcing the withdrawal of the article.
Access to Raw Data
At the request of the editorial board, authors may be invited to provide the raw data relating to their research. If the article is based on clinical cases involving real-life situations, the author undertakes to respect the anonymity of the individuals referred to in that article, or to obtain their explicit authorization.
Paper and Digital Publication
When submitting an article, authors undertake to authorize its distribution in both hardcopy and digital formats, particularly on the cairn.info platform, unless express notification by them to the contrary.