Navigation – Plan du site

Publication ethics and malpractice statement

Résumé

This file has been partly drawn from the Publishing ethics resource kit and in compliance with Elsevier recommendations.

Haut de page

Publishing Ethics

RIEF is a peer-reviewed journal committed to ensuring the highest standards of publication ethics. The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. All parties involved in the act of publishing (editors, authors, reviewers and the publisher) have to agree upon standards of ethical behaviour. Therefore, we state the following principles of Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement based on the Publishing ethics resource kit and in compliance with Elsevier recommendations.

Editorial Definition

Title: Revue italienne d’études françaises

Subtitle: Littérature, langue, culture

ISSN electronic edition: 2240-7456

Frequency: Annual

Date of creation: 2011

Publisher: Seminario di filologia francese

Copyright and Access

Publication: in open access

Creative Commons - Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported - CC BY-NC-ND 3.0

Publication fees: none

Submission fees: none

Review process: double blind peer review

Average time between submission and publication: 10 weeks

Duties of the Publisher

Guardianship of the scholarly record

RIEF recognises the role of the “Seminario di Filologia Francese” as its Publisher. The Publisher is committed to supporting the work undertaken by the Editorial Board and by peer reviewers. It is furthermore committed to maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record.

The Publisher is responsible for ensuring that best practice is followed in its publications.

Duties of the Editorial Board

Publication decisions

The Editorial Board of RIEF is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers always drive such decisions.

Fair play

The Editorial Board of RIEF evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality

The Editorial Board of RIEF must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors must recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers. Editors require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication.

Involvement and cooperation in investigations

The Editorial Board of RIEF is committed to take reasonably responsive measures if ethical complaints are presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher. Every reported act of unethical publishing behaviour will be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions.

Peer review assists the Editorial Board in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of the scientific method. In addition to the specific ethics-related duties described below, reviewers are asked to treat authors and their work as they would like to be treated themselves and to observe good reviewing etiquette.

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible must notify the Editorial Board and decline to participate in the review process.

Confidentiality.

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not share the review or information about the paper with anyone or contact the authors directly without permission from the editor.

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

Alertness to Ethical Issues.

Every reviewer must be alert to potential ethical issues in the paper and must bring these to the attention of the Editorial Board, including any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which the reviewer has personal knowledge. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported must be accompanied by the relevant citation.

Standards of Objectivity & Competing Interests.

Reviews must be conducted objectively. Reviewers are aware of any personal bias they may have and take this into account when reviewing a paper. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees must express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Reviewers must consult the Editorial Board before agreeing to review a paper where they have potential conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

If a reviewer suggests that an author includes citations to the reviewer’s (or their associates’) work, this must be for genuine scientific reasons and not with the intention of increasing the reviewer’s citation count or enhancing the visibility of their work (or that of their associates).

Duties of Authors

Originality and Acknowledgement of Sources

RIEF asks authors to ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted and permission has been obtained where necessary.

Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. RIEF condemns plagiarism in all its forms as an unacceptable unethical behaviour.

Notification of Fundamental Errors

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal Editorial Board and cooperate with the Editorial Board to retract or correct the paper if deemed necessary.

Image Integrity

Authors should not enhance, obscure, move, remove, or introduce a specific feature within an image. Manipulating images for improved clarity is accepted, but manipulation for other purposes could be seen as scientific ethical abuse and will be dealt with accordingly.

  • Logo ANVUR
  • Logo Seminario di Filologia Francese
  • OpenEdition Journals