To ensure the integrity of the production and dissemination of scientific research, the journal Atalaya. Revue d’études médiévales romanes adheres to the principles and requirements of scientific integrity set out in the French Research Code (article L. 211-2), which aim to guarantee the honesty and scientific rigour of research and to strengthen the bond of trust with society. It applies the ethical rules set out in this code of ethics. This document is inspired by European recommendations on ethics and scientific integrity and draws on the recommendations the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity developed by ALLEA, the opinions of the CNRS ethics committee (COMETS, from whom we consulted in particular the guide Integrity and Responsibility in Research Practices and the French National Charter for Research Integrity), documents produced by the Open Science Committee, as well as codes of ethics proposed by other journals.

We encourage our committee members, authors, and reviewers to adhere to this code of ethics.

1. Editorial board commitments

The editorial board agrees to subject submissions to a rigorous and diligent selection and review process, in accordance with the principles set out in the journal’s author guidelines. In particular, it ensures compliance with the publication deadlines specified in calls for papers.

After a preliminary review by the journal’s editorial team to ensure the relevance of submissions (thematic alignment with the journal’s scope and compliance with the general formal requirements of a scientific publication), all manuscripts undergo double-blind peer review in accordance with the review policy stated on the journal’s website. Publication decisions are based on at least two reviews.

Confidentiality

Information regarding a manuscript submitted to the journal is not disclosed outside the editorial board, except to the authors, and to the reviewers.

The editorial board guarantees the confidentiality of the review process, in particular the anonymity of reviewers. Reviewers’ contributions are acknowledged through the publication of an annual list that does not link their names to the articles they have reviewed.

Impartiality

The editorial board ensures that reviews are conducted with objectivity and impartiality.

Copyright infringement

The editorial board takes into account legal requirements regarding defamation and copyright infringement in its decisions. It reserves the right to examine articles using all available means of verification. In the event of substantial borrowing from other works without proper citation of sources, the submission will be rejected.

All members of the editorial board and the scientific committee are consulted in the event of a dispute.

2. Authors’ commitments

Originality of submissions

Authors agree to submit original article proposals to the journal. Articles must not be submitted simultaneously to other journals or publishers. However, the journal Atalaya. Revue d’études médiévales romanes may agree to publish for the first time in French a text originally written and previously published in another language.

Use of artificial intelligence

Authors who use artificial intelligence (AI) to assist with manuscript writing, the production of images or graphics (textual and multimedia content), or for data collection and analysis must demonstrate transparency by indicating in the “Materials and Methods” section (or a similar section) of the article how the AI tool was used and which tool they used. Authors are entirely responsible for the content of their manuscript, including any sections produced by an AI tool, and are therefore responsible for any breaches of publication ethics.

Sources and references

Authors agree to explicitly acknowledge the works and materials on which their text is based, citing the relevant individuals and sources. It is their responsibility to obtain the necessary permissions for reproduction.

Listing of authors

The list of co-authors for an article includes individuals who have made a significant contribution—beyond formal editing or an advisory role—to the design of the research presented, the collection, preparation, or analysis of data, or the critical interpretation of the results. When an article has multiple authors, the corresponding author must ensure that all individuals concerned have reread and approved the version of the article submitted to the journal. Similarly, during the review process and up until publication, if changes are made to the text, all co-authors must be informed.

Defamatory statements

Authors agree to adhere to the rules of scientific debate and to refrain from making defamatory statements that could be interpreted as causing harm to the reputation of a third party.

Conflicts of interest

Authors agree to declare any potential conflict of interest, whether professional or financial, and to explicitly disclose all sources of funding for their research.

Unethical conduct

In the event of suspected unethical conduct (plagiarism, use of fraudulent data), authors must respond to any inquiries addressed to them. If the suspicion is confirmed, they agree to correct their article or withdraw it.

3. Reviewers’ commitments

Responsibilities

By accepting to conduct the review, reviewers agree to submit their review within the agreed-upon time frame, using the review grid provided, and to identify, wherever possible, any unattributed borrowings from other works. They agree to provide a well-reasoned, constructive, impartial, and non-discriminatory review conducted with objectivity and fairness. In the case of a single-blind review where the author’s identity is known to the reviewer, no form of discrimination is acceptable.

Confidentiality

Reviewers guarantee the confidentiality of the manuscript entrusted to them and agree not to use it in any other context or to disclose any elements of the article (excerpts, results, data, etc.) prior to its publication.

Conflicts of interest

Reviewers agree to notify the editorial board of any conflict of interest, such as affiliation with the same institution, a past or present collaboration, a joint publication, a situation of professional competition, a hierarchical relationship (e.g., thesis supervision), or a personal relationship that could compromise the quality and independence of the review. In the event of a conflict of interest with an author or with the content of the article under review, reviewers are required to recuse themselves.