Ethical Code

The ethical code of "puntOorg International Journal", a six-monthly publication of the puntOorg International Research Network Association, is inspired by the Code of Ethics for Publications developed by the COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors: https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Guidelines.

Responsibilities of the Editorial bodies

The editorial team of the Journal (Editor in Chief, Associate editors, and Scientific Advisory Board) ensures the correctness of the procedures for the evaluation, acceptance or rejection of the contributions proposed by the authors.

They guarantee, in particular, the reviewing process according to “the double-blind review”, ensuring the mutual anonymity of reviewers and author. The editorial team have the duty to avoid any conflict of interest and discrimination.

If the Editorial team is informed of serious errors or inaccuracies or conflicts of interest or plagiarism in a contribution submitted for publication, or published, it will inform the Author and the Publisher, who will take the necessary steps to clarify the matter and, if necessary, invite the withdrawal of the contribution or prepare an erratum.

Authors Responsibilities

Each author who submits a contribution for the purposes of evaluation and possible publication declares that he/she/* knows and respects the following ethical criteria:

  • originality and prohibition of plagiarism;
  • prohibition of multiple publications;
  • absence of conflict of interest;
  • indication of any research funding bodies;
  • not to submit the same contribution to other journals during the evaluation phase;
  • timely reporting of errors in the contributions submitted;
  • correct indication of sources;
  • the veracity of the data presented and objectivity of the interpretations.

The author* must follow the editorial guidelines of pIJ and the time indicated for the submission of the contribution. If requested, it must provide the sources or data on which its contribution is based, so that they can be kept for a significant period after publication and, if necessary, be made accessible and traceable ex-post.

All those who have contributed substantially to the writing of the contribution, who have approved the final version of the contribution and who agree with the publication should be listed as co-authors or contributors.

Fraudulent or willful misrepresentation is unacceptable as it constitutes unethical behaviour.

If an author identifies any material errors or inaccuracies in a published contribution, he/she/* must notify the Editorial team of this fact and provide it with all the information necessary to carry out a corrigendum.

Responsibilities of the Reviewers

The reviewer assists the Scientific Advisory Board in the process of evaluating the contributions submitted by the authors, within the assigned deadlines. The review must be conducted objectively, using clear and documented arguments. If the reviewer does not feel suitable for the proposed task or knows that he/she/* cannot read and evaluate the contribution within the required timeframe, he/she/* must promptly notify the Scientific Advisory board. The reviewer does not accept manuscripts in respect of which he/she/* has conflicts of interest.

The reviewers observe the following ethical criteria:

  • contribution to the decision of the Editorial team;
  • respect for deadlines;
  • confidentiality.

The review process is finalized, where possible, to allow the author to improve his/her/* contribution. Where bibliographic or documentary shortcomings are identified in the evaluated contribution, the reviewers are required to indicate them to the authors.

The reviewer undertakes to inform the Editorial team of any overlapping or similarity of the text evaluated with other works already published.

 

Moreover pIJ being an electronic journal provides that each Issue:

- is formally identifiable and citable thanks to its numbering and dating;

- is in itself completed, not open to further updates and with progressive page numbering;

- contains within it, as a rule, at least six scientific articles excluding editorials, premises, prefaces, indexes, abstracts, posters, work plan, bibliography, events.