Publication ethics

BioLaw Journal – Rivista di BioDiritto
Publication ethics and publication malpractice

BioLaw Journal – Rivista di BioDiritto is committed to the respect of ethical values of scientific research, to promote the circulation of science in line with the principles of transparency in contributions’ selection and of Open Access standards.

Authors, editors and referees are required to be aware of and agree upon the following principles, based on the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors del COPE – Committee On Publication Ethics.

 

Steering Committee and Editorial Boards

Decisions on publication

The Steering Committee conducts a preliminary screening on submitted papers, to check their adherence to the focus and scope of the Journal and the respect of minimum requirements for publication. In case of a positive outcome of the preliminary screening, the Steering Committee chooses two referees among the experts in the scientific area. In the event of divergent assessments by the evaluators, the decision on publication rests with the Steering Committee, subject to the possible opinion of a third evaluator. In exceptional cases (invited contributions, special issues or thematic focuses), the Steering Committee may decide to make limited exceptions to the double-blind review rule.

Fair Play

The Steering Committee and the Editorial Boards at any time evaluate manuscripts for their scientific content, granting the pluralism of ideas.

Confidentiality

The Steering Committee and the Editorial Boards must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers and the publisher.

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Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author.

Referees

Manuscripts submitted to BioLaw Journal – Rivista di BioDiritto are sent, after their anonymization, to two reviewers, selected by the Steering Committee among the experts of the relevant scientific discipline. The peer-review procedure contributes to the raising of the quality level of the Journal, it grants the publication of manuscripts that received a positive evaluation by two experts and may also assist the author in improving the paper.

Promptness

Reviewers are required to respect the deadline for the submission of their opinion, in order to help the Editorial Boards in respecting the timing of publication.

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Associate Editors in a timely manner, to permit a prompt substation and an adequate evaluation of submitted manuscripts.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively and should exclusively be based on the contents of the contribution. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest and in this case should promptly inform the Associate Editors.

Authors

Originality and Plagiarism

BioLaw Journal considers for publication original and unpublished works. Upon submission, authors shall declare that their manuscript is completely original and that they cited all text and sources they used. The Steering Committee will eventually consider the submission of essays to be published in paper book-series or already published on foreign reviews, which are not freely accessible in Italy. Articles or essays already published on online Reviews or websites will not be considered for publication.

Acknowledgement of sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work and should cite them in adherence to the Journal’s editorial guidelines.

Authorship of the paper

Authorship should be properly assigned; all those who have made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study should be listed as co-authors.

The Authors retain the copyright on their work and authorise and grant the University of Trento publishing house the right to publish the digital edition, under the Creative Commons CC BY-SA 4.0 licence, on the TESeO (Trento Editions Service for Open science) platform in accordance with the principle of Open Access set out in the University's Statute and Policy on Open Science.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the Associate Editors and cooperate with them to retract or correct the paper.

Procedures for post-publication publicity

The Editorial Board undertakes to collect any reports and requests for changes, dealing with them in a documented and transparent manner for the reading public, indicating them at the foot of the article already published. To facilitate the publicity of the post-publication debate, the Editorial Board undertakes to set up and keep up-to-date a space on the Journal's website, suitable for the publication of reply notes and letters to the Editor. The Notices function of the TESeO platform hosting the Journal itself will also be used to publicise the notes and letters.