Code of ethics and good practice for Authors

This code[1] proposes some guidelines to guide the good behaviour of authors who aspire to publish their work in this journal, in order to ensure quality research and the maintenance of Análisis's good reputation. It is recommended that these guidelines be carefully considered before submitting any manuscript for evaluation.

 

1. Responsibility

1.1 Authors are expected to assume responsibility for all data, statements and allusions in the text.

1.2 Whether one or more authors, personal data (name, institutional affiliation and lines of research or philosophical specialisation) should be clearly and fully specified.

1.3 Authors should be aware that only one submission per number, or in any case one article and one review, is acceptable for publication.

1.4 When authors decide to withdraw a work before it is published, they should inform the editors as soon as possible.

1.5 Authors should respond in a clear, simple, and professionally correct manner to comments made by evaluators on their work, and should do so as soon as possible (evaluators are also required to have clear, simple, and professionally correct comments).

1.6 Authors should ensure that they have the appropriate permission, or where appropriate the required licence or certification, for the input of data, analyses, surveys or comments taken from any source other than their own authorship, and should cite such materials in a respectful and academically correct manner. Likewise, they must not publish the personal data of other persons without the express consent of the affected persons, scrupulously complying with current legislation on personal data (the reference legislation for Analysis will be that of Spain and that of the European Union).

1.7 Once their article has been published, authors must ask the Analysis Editor for permission to reproduce it (in whole or in part) in any other publication: in another journal, as a chapter or part of a book, or even in the case of translations into other languages.

1.8 After a paper has been accepted for publication in Análisis, authors will receive a layout version of the paper, which should be revised as soon as possible, sending the editors the list with the errors they have detected, so that they can be corrected in time. But they should not take this opportunity to introduce changes in the form and even less in the content of the text that has been accepted.

1.9 Authors are expected to present their work in an academically appropriate and professional manner, with the necessary bibliographical references and citations from other sources. Authors should not refer to any citations in their work that have not actually been read and worked on.

1.10 In the case of reviews, the research reflected in the reviewed work will be honestly presented, as well as the conclusions drawn from it, trying to impartially point out its strengths and weaknesses.

 

2. Transparency of authorship and co-authorship

2.1 In the case of a text whose authorship has been shared by several persons, all the authors involved must give their consent for its publication. The author listed as contact person for Analysis must have the express consent of the other authors and submit it to the editors of the journal if requested.

2.2 In some cases, there are researchers who have collaborated in the preparation of the text but who are not listed as authors, because their collaboration has been little substantial or purely technical. In these cases, the author(s) should indicate in the footnote on the first page of the text the relevant acknowledgements.

2.3 Authors are expected to be transparent about the support they have received for their texts, indicating whether they have had access to public or private resources, funding of any kind, specific material or equipment for carrying out the research, as well as the media that have provided them with data, statistics and even technical support for translation and style improvements (for example, if the article to be published has been poured into English from the original in Spanish, the name of the person who has done the translation should be included).

2.4 The signature of the article should reflect the names of those who actually contributed to the text according to the importance of their contributions in terms of the work carried out: from most important (first name) to least (last name).

2.5 Ensure that only people who have made a relevant contribution to the work sign it. In this way, the signatures of "guest authors" should be avoided, i.e. those persons who have not participated in the text but whose name appears on the signature of the text because it indicates a reference to authority in the field in which the work is being researched. The signatures of "guest authors" should also be avoided, i.e., those who have not made any contribution to the work but who appear among the signatories to compensate some personal favour. Finally, the practice of so-called "ghost authors" should be avoided, that is, those who have made substantial contributions to the article but who do not appear in the signature of the article because they have preferred to favour in a special way those who do appear as signatories.

2.6 Any change in the authorship of a joint text must have the agreement of all the members of the text, including the author who has been replaced or removed. This information must be communicated sufficiently in advance to the editors of the journal, in order to make the necessary changes prior to publication.

 

3. Honesty

3.1 Authors should present their research honestly and sincerely, without tampering with data. Thus, authors are expected to be meticulous in exposing their method of study and presenting their findings or conclusions, without subterfuge or ambiguity.

3.2 Authors should always present the conclusions and results of their research without omitting results that are inconvenient, inconsistent, or that do not support the main hypothesis.

 

4. Originality

4.1 Authors must ensure the originality of their works, guaranteeing, from the moment they are sent to the journal, that they have not published the same research in any other place or in any other language. In particular, authors should not submit the same work (in whole or in part) to two publications at the same time.

4.2 If a manuscript contains material that coincides with a previously published work, or is still in press or under consideration by another journal, the author should reference it by citation, indicating the state of the information it gathers (in press, or published).

4.3 Authors must comply with copyright laws and conventions properly. Tables, figures, or reproductions of other people's works must be reproduced only with proper permission and must be referenced in acknowledgments, and never reproduced in a way that implies that the person presenting them is the sole author of such materials.

4.4 Authors should clearly identify in their research those parts that rely on the work of others, including translations and adaptations of other texts, always citing the original.

4.5 Authors should minimize autocites in an article. Such practices should be avoided. In addition, autocites should appear without indicating the name of the authors in the manuscript, in order to ensure blind assessment. In case of using autocitas, the author will replace his name with the concept "Author". In case of more than one, the following format will be used: Author 1, Author 2, etc. Authors should avoid redundancy and self-plagiarism. They should also avoid the recycling of substantial parts of previous works already published in all their forms: neither copying sentences or paragraphs directly, nor paraphrasing research already carried out. It is also considered an inappropriate practice of an author to create multiple articles on the basis of one already published.

4.6 Authors should avoid plagiarism, falsification or omission of significant material and any form of it. In other words, direct plagiarism, copying or paraphrasing of substantial parts of the work of other authors, as well as the attribution of one's own results to others, should be avoided.

4.7 The journal Análisis reserves the right to investigate, evaluate and report plagiarism in the works it publishes. If such bad practices are detected, the journal reserves the right to remove the affected works from its online archive, replacing the text of the article with an explanatory note that the withdrawn work has violated established academic and legal standards.

 

5. Conflict of interest

5.1 A conflict of interest is any situation in which there are secondary motivations or intentions in the process of publishing a work in a scientific journal other than strictly research interests. These situations can cause the reasonable reader to be disappointed or deceived, because he or she detects that the relationships between the people who make up the journal are unethical. It is a matter of favor or conflict relationships in the personal, commercial, political, academic or financial, which may condition the judgement of readers, authors, evaluators or editors of the journal. Therefore, authors, as initial members of the research process, are expected to disclose any financial support and possible conflict of interest that may have an influence on the interpretation results of the article. In the case of financial resources and any other type of sponsorship, this should be stated in a footnote on the first page of the paper.

5.2 By submitting a manuscript to Analysis, the author has the opportunity to suggest or recommend potential evaluators based on their experience in a particular topic. However, when exercising this right, authors should avoid any potential or actual conflict of interest.

 

6. Blind Peer Review

6.1 Authors shall accept the blind peer review process at all times. Therefore, they should not include in their manuscript any personal (or other) reference that could identify them. The anonymous relationship between evaluator and author must be respected at all times.

6.2 Authors have the right to propose or discourage certain specialists in a research area to act as evaluators of their manuscript. However, the decision as to who will evaluate the manuscript rests with the editors of the journal, who will not inform the authors of the identity of the selected evaluators.

6.3 Authors will accept the evaluators' assessment, as well as the editors' final decision regarding the acceptance or rejection of a manuscript.

 

[1] This Code follows closely the one Daimon published in 2019. We thank the editors of this magazine for their generosity in giving us permission to use their text to formulate the Analysis. As in the former, we have tried to maintain an inclusive language throughout the text: generic masculine expressions (editors, editor, etc.) should be understood as an option that allows a less cumbersome reading, which in no case intends to exclude people of feminine gender.