About the Journal

1. EDITORIAL COMMITMENTS

1.1. Decision to publish

The editors are responsible for deciding which papers are published in the journal, always on the basis of double-blind peer review reports carried out by the reviewers. The editors will select the most qualified and specialised reviewers to ensure a critical and expert assessment of the work. Under no circumstances will the authors’ ethnicity, sex, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, nationality or political views be taken into account. The decision to publish an article will be based exclusively on the article’s significance, originality and clarity, the validity of the study conducted and its relevance, as well as on legal considerations relating to possible defamation, copyright infringements and plagiarism.

1.2. Confidentiality and disclosure

The editors will not disclose information about any manuscript to anyone other than the relevant authors, reviewers or other potential advisers required for the journal’s operations. The editors are committed to maintaining the confidentiality of manuscripts, their authors and reviewers, so that anonymity preserves the intellectual integrity of the entire process. Materials not ultimately published in the journal shall not be used by any member of the editorial team without the author’s explicit written consent.

1.3. Adherence to deadlines

The editors bear ultimate responsibility for ensuring that deadlines for the review and publication of accepted papers are met, in order to ensure the rapid dissemination of their findings. Accepted papers shall not remain unpublished for longer than is strictly necessary for their inclusion in the next issue.

2. REVIEWERS’ COMMITMENTS

2.1. Contribution to editorial decisions

Reviewers shall at all times conduct a double-blind review process of the manuscripts, assisting the editorial team in their decision-making and helping the author to improve the article.

2.2. Conflict of interest and timeliness of the process

Any reviewer of the journal who has been selected to review an article but who does not feel qualified to assess it, or who is unable to do so within the requested timeframe, must inform the editorial team of these circumstances so that they may be removed from the review process. Reviewers undertake to assess manuscripts as quickly as possible in order to meet the submission deadlines.

Similarly, if a reviewer has any conflict of interest arising from competitive, collaborative or other relationships with any of the authors, companies or institutions associated with the manuscript received for review, they must decline to carry out that review.

2.3. Objectivity

Reviewers’ assessments must be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers must provide sufficient reasons for their assessments, supported by arguments, and submit a comprehensive critical report in accordance with the journal’s published guidelines, particularly if they recommend that the paper be rejected.

2.4. Identification of sources

Reviewers shall identify instances where the author of the article has referred to other relevant published works but has not cited them in the references section. They must also indicate whether observations or arguments derived from other publications are accompanied by the corresponding reference. Reviewers shall notify the editorial team of any substantial similarity or overlap between the article in question and other previously published documents of which they are aware.

2.5. Confidentiality and disclosure

Reviewers must not disclose information about any manuscript to anyone and must not use such information for personal purposes.

3. AUTHORS’ COMMITMENTS

3.1. Originality and accuracy

Authors must submit research, innovation and/or knowledge transfer articles that are always original and have not been submitted to other journals for publication. Similarly, manuscripts under review by this journal must not be submitted simultaneously to other journals. Submitting the same article to more than one journal is considered ethically wrong and reprehensible. Manuscripts that have been published as copyright-protected material elsewhere may not be submitted. Publishing articles in which the same results are repeated in more than one scientific journal is an unethical practice.

Similarly, the authors are responsible for the accuracy of the information presented in the document. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable. Authors may be asked to provide further information, sources or data from their study for review, if deemed necessary, as well as to retain them for a reasonable period after publication and to make them publicly available, where feasible.

3.2. Plagiarism and Acknowledgement of Sources

Authors must cite all sources that have been instrumental to their work, properly acknowledging the work and/or words of others. Authors must ensure that their paper does not contain sections taken from other authors or from other parts of works previously published by the authors themselves, without the corresponding citation.

3.3. Authorship

All those who have made a significant scientific and intellectual contribution to the conceptualisation, planning, execution, interpretation and/or drafting of the study must be listed as authors. Those who have not made a significant contribution to the submitted manuscript should be excluded. It is recommended that authors be ranked according to their actual level of responsibility and involvement. The corresponding author must ensure the accuracy of these facts and verify that all co-authors have approved the final version of the paper and its submission to this journal. To this end, the corresponding author will be asked to provide a letter, signed by all co-authors, setting out and justifying all the points outlined in this section, from the order of authorship to the actual responsibility of the co-authors.

3.4. Responsibility

All authors are responsible for the content of the manuscript submitted to the journal. The authors undertake to have carried out a review of the most up-to-date and relevant scientific literature on the subject under analysis.

3.5. Conflict of interest and disclosure

Authors must declare any potential conflict of interest that may have influenced the results obtained or the proposed interpretations. Similarly, authors must indicate in their manuscript the organisations, institutions, agencies and/or projects from which the article originates, as well as any financial support, where applicable.

3.6. Errors in published articles

Where an author identifies a significant error or inaccuracy in their article, they must immediately inform the journal’s editors and provide them with all the necessary information to list the relevant corrections at the bottom of the same article.