Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

 

Philologica Canariensia publishes high-quality papers that undergo double-blind peer review by nationally and internationally renowned experts. The journal maintains the highest standards of ethical conduct in research and adheres to COPE’s Code of Conduct. Authors, the Editor-in-Chief, the Editorial Board, and reviewers shall abide by COPE’s Core Practices (https://publicationethics.org/core-practices). This guide establishes the ethical procedure to be followed by authors, editorial committees, and reviewers, the content of which is summarized below:

Authors

1.- Authors must observe the journal’s Guidelines and Ethical Code, which abides by COPE’s Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines (https://publicationethics.org/core-practices).

2.- Contributions submitted to Philologica Canariensia must not be under consideration elsewhere.

3.- All submissions (articles, notes, and book reviews) must be original and not previously published, either in whole or in part.

4.- Plagiarism and self-plagiarism (reusing one’s own work without acknowledging that it has appeared before, either in whole or in part) are unacceptable practices. The falsification of information, research data, and/or results is another instance of academic fraud. All manuscripts containing plagiarized, self-plagiarized, or falsified content, as well as other forms of academic malpractice, will be rejected by the journal (see Ethics in Research & Publication – Elsevier).

5.- If plagiarism or academic fraud is found out after the article/note/book review is published, a retraction note will be added explaining the reasons for retraction. The corrigendum will be published in the table of contents of the next issue. A link to the correction note will be added in the published version of the manuscript.

6.- Authors must engage in the review process and respond to the reviewers' comments and suggestions.

7.- If the submission is signed by more than one author, the corresponding author will inform the Editor and provide the other author(s)’ email and institutional affiliation. All authors must have significantly contributed to the research.

8.- If the submission contains material protected by copyright, authors will send to the journal's email address (philologica@ulpgc.es) a signed document where the copyright owner(s) authorize the author to reproduce the material.

Editor and Editorial Board

1.- The Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board adhere to COPE’s Core Practices in the evaluation process (https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Guidelines). The Editor will use Elsevier’s Publishing Ethics Resource Kit (https://www.elsevier.com/editors/perk) for handling allegations.

2.- The Editor will be committed to raise the quality of the journal.

3.- The Editor will ensure that the journal publishes high-quality papers.

4.- The Editor will reject all submissions suspected of plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and other forms of ethical misconduct and academic fraud (falsification, fabrication and manipulation of information, research data and/or results, etc.). COPE’s flowcharts (https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Flowcharts) show how the Editor will respond in cases of suspected misconduct.

5.- When suspected cases of plagiarism, self-plagiarism and other forms of academic fraud occur, the Editor will inform the author and explain the reason for manuscript rejection.

6.- If the article is already published, the Editor will include a retraction note.

7.- The Editor and the Editorial Board will ensure a fair and unbiased review. Acceptance or rejection of manuscripts will depend only on their academic value.

8.- The Editor will ensure that the journal adheres to strict double-blind peer review. Manuscripts having a positive initial review by the Editorial Board will be sent to relevant experts. This will ensure the academic rigor of the peer-review process.

9.- The Editor will preserve the anonymity of the reviewers.

10.- The members of the Editorial Board will preserve the confidentiality of the manuscript they review. They will not use information from the unpublished manuscript in their own works.

11.- The Editor will ensure that the review process is timely and that it will not take longer than six months.

12.- If members of the Editorial Board submit a contribution to the journal, the Editor will ensure the anonymity, independence, and confidentiality of the peer-review process and will not reveal the identity of the reviewers.

13.- To avoid any potential conflict of interests, the Editor-in-Chief will not make any submission to the journal.

Reviewers

1.- Reviewers will observe COPE’s Code of Conduct for Peer Reviewers (https://publicationethics.org/peerreview) and Ethical Guidelines, which may be downloaded at https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/cope-ethical-guidelines-peer-reviewers.

2.- Reviewers will agree to review only if they have the necessary expertise to assess the manuscript.

3.- Reviewers will make a fair, objective and unbiased review of the manuscript. Their reviews should be constructive. Reviewers will also provide arguments that support their decision to accept or reject a manuscript.

4.- Reviewers will not make derogatory comments about the author.

5.- Reviewers, including those who decline to review, will preserve the confidentiality of the review process. They will not use the unpublished material for their own advantage.

6.- Reviewers will inform the Editor if there is a potential conflict of interests. They should decline to review the manuscript when a potential conflict of interests occurs.

7.- If reviewers know that the manuscript has been published before, contains plagiarized or self-plagiarized material, or fabricates/manipulates data, they will inform the Editor.

8.- Reviewers should not delay the review process and should hand in their report in a timely manner.