Referees
Referees who accept assessing an article for the journal must not commit the following infractions. Any offence that is not hereby directly stated will follow from the breaching of the general duties.
Possible measures against referees who commit any misconduct are indicated here.
- Improper Reviews
An ethical infraction takes place whenever a dishonest, imprecise, arbitrary, discriminatory or contradictory opinion is given that shows a lack of rigour in its preparation. The referee must likewise avoid proposing changes or rejecting an article in order to favour an opinion, either personal or that of someone close to them.
Referees must rigorously, impartially and honestly complete the peer-review template sent by the journal. Comments made on an article must likewise be based on clear, reasoned, constructive and strictly academic arguments, and must show the respect due in an academic environment.
In order to establish whether this ethical infraction has taken place, an adequate comparison must be made with the assessment submitted by the other referee, and the article under review must be taken into account.
- Delegating the Role
An ethical infraction takes place whenever a referee delegates his role to a third party. This is because a referee’s work is strictly personal.
- Omission of Conflicts of Interest
Referees must disclose timely, honestly and clearly the real or potential conflicts of interest that may influence their actions or decision-making. Should referees become aware of a conflict of interest with the article under review, they are to notify the journal and abstain from assessing the article.
- Improper Request of Citations
Referees will commit an ethical infraction should they request that the authors cite specific studies for non-academic reasons, such as obtaining an undue advantage.
- Failure to Disclose a Lack of Thematic Competence
An ethical infraction arises whenever referees fail to disclose that they are unsuited for the review, either when they are invited to act as such or whilst they assess the article. Referees are required to disclose their lack of thematic competence.
- Breaches of Confidentiality
Due to the confidentiality of the information, an ethical infraction arises whenever a referee shares the article under review with people, institutions or other third parties unconnected with their task. Referees are allowed to consult third parties in regard to a given subject under review, so long as the text is not shared. Confidentiality holds even for those individuals who decline being referees after having begun the review. The content of the article and the ideas that follow from it must in no case be used by the referee in specific studies, except once the article has been duly published and on condition it is properly cited.
- Obstructing Collaboration
Referees pledge to provide all the information required to establish whether an ethical infraction has or has not been committed. Obstructing the inquest or taking reprisals against the complainants will thus be considered an infraction against these guidelines.
