Publication and Authorship
The Journal expects authors to observe the highest standards in publication ethics (concerning plagiarism, misappropriation of others’ works, etc.). As a reminder, the editorial committee recalls that is not good practice to publish the same contribution in more than one journal or volume. Consequently, it is strongly suggested not to submit the same paper to more than one journal at the same time. Once submitted, the author will be acknowledged of the paper reception by e-mail. The first phase of the editorial process will evaluate quality and interest of the proposed contribution in consideration of the editorial scope of Mediterranea; and will assess the fulfilment of the stylistic requirements presented in these guidelines. Negative evaluation of these requirements will lead to the exclusion of the manuscript, which will be promptly communicated to the author.
All articles accepted for publications will appear in the next issue of the Journal, which is published once a year in March. Mediterranea is committed to safeguarding all rights associated with authorship and intellectual property. Each piece published in the Journal (no matter which Section it belongs to) will be assigned a DOI, which identifies each individual article uniquely and persistently. All articles, as well as each Journal's issue as a whole, display the exact date of publication, in order to make sure that no content is added, removed, or edited after publication.
Submitted papers will undergo a process of double blind peer-review, evaluating the author’s contribution to the field and the authenticity of the proposed data. Authors are expected to meaningfully contribute, with their submission, to the scholarly debate on the selected topic. Authors are also urged to provide any correction to the submitted paper as soon as possible.
Peer-Review and Reviewers’ Responsibilities
The editorial board of the Mediterranea will assure an objective peer-review process, avoiding any possible conflict of interest. In this sense, the Journal confirms that reviewed articles will be treated confidentially. Papers must be submitted anonymously in order to undergo the blind peer-review process. At least two scholars among the most eminent experts in the field will review the manuscript. The peer-reviewers will not be members of the editorial committee or its board, but may belong to advisory board. The journal editors will choose the referees in consideration of scientific merits and professional experience. Reviewers are required to disclose any potential competing interests before agreeing to review a submission. Reviewers will submit a detailed report on the quality, interest, and potential impact of the manuscript, which will be carefully considered by the editorial committee while assessing the manuscript submission. In case of disagreement between the two reports, the manuscript will be submitted to a third referee. Acceptation and refusal of the manuscript, as well as suggested or required modifications, will be promptly communicated to the author. Inclusion of required modification into the manuscript is conditional to its final acceptation. If considered necessary by the editorial committee, the new version of the manuscript will undergo a further peer-review process before being eventually accepted (or rejected). Authors will be kept appraised throughout the editorial process. Once the paper is accepted, the peer-reviewed and revised version of the manuscript will be uploaded to the OJS platform. The Journal will send to the author the article proofs, which must be corrected and returned within 25 calendar days.
The Journal is committed to guarantee that each submission is given careful, non-biased, and well thought-out examination by the external referees. This is achieved by making sure that external referees are renowned experts in the field within which the topic of the submission falls, that they are committed to the task of providing a fair and attentive judgement, and that no competing interests of any sort exist between the referee/s and the submission under exam. In addition, the Journal’s editors will carefully assess all reports coming from peer-review readers to make sure that all standards of quality, integrity, and fair judgement have been met. If the editors find that these standards have not been satisfied adequately (e.g the report makes it clear that the external reader has not performed a close scrutiny of the submission, or that he/she has been unjustly dismissive of it, or that he/she does not ground his/her assessments on solid and unbiased evidence), they will ask the external reader/s to provide a new report, or they will ask a new reader/s to provide one. Authors will always be kept informed about all steps of the review process. Authors also have the right to appeal against editorial decisions if they find that their submission has not been given adequate and fair assessment. If this happens, authors will need to refer to the Journal staff directly (firstname.lastname@example.org). One or more members of the staff will carefully review the submission along with all peer-review reports produced to make sure that all the above-mentioned standards are met. They will be in close touch with the author to provide explanations and clarifications about the review process and the specific content of each peer-review report, and they will be willing to have the submission undergo a new peer-review process if circumstances require to do so.
The Journal editors assume complete responsibility and authority to reject or accept an article, the editors confirm that they have no conflict of interests with respect to articles they reject/accept, that they will only accept a paper when they are reasonably certain of its authenticity. If errors are found, the editors will promote publication of correction or retraction, preserving the anonymity of reviewers.
The editors’ decision to accept or reject a paper for publication will be based exclusively on the paper’s importance, originality and clarity, and the study’s validity and its relevance to the remit of the Journal. Editors will never reverse decision to accept a submission unless serious problems are identified with the submission (e.g. plagiarism, misconduct etc.).
The editors are committed to provide new editorial board members with guidelines on everything that is expected of them and to keep existing members updated on new policies and developments. The editors of the Journal consult all editorial board members at least once a year to gauge their opinions about the running of the Journal, to inform them of any change to Journal policies, and to identify future challenges.
Relations with Readers
Readers will always be informed about who has funded research or other scholarly work and whether the funders had any role in the research and its publication and, if so, what this was. In order to champion transparency, the Journal also ensures that non-peer-review sections are clearly identified. As a general rule, ‘Articles’ undergo peer-review process by two anonymous external experts, ‘Review Articles’ and ‘Notes’ are peer-reviewed by one anonymous external expert, while ‘In Memoriam’ contributions and simple ‘Reviews’ are not peer-reviewed, although they undergo careful revision by one or more members of the Journal’s staff to ensure that all necessary standards of quality, integrity, and ethical conduct are adequately met.
Publishing ethics will be monitored and safeguarded by the Journal’s editorial board on the basis of a use of guidelines for retracting articles, and a maintenance of the integrity of the academic record. The Journal always will be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies, when needed, on the basis that neither plagiarism nor fraudulent data will be published. The editors of the Journal encourage and are willing to consider cogent criticisms of work published in the Journal. If such a circumstance arises, authors of criticized material will be given the opportunity to respond.
In all cases of complaints and criticisms, the editors of the journal will be committed to adhere to the COPE flowchart on complaints.
Privacy of authors and reviewers is crucial to Mediterranea. International Journal on the Transfer of Knowledge. This privacy statement provides information about the personal information that Mediterranea collects, and the ways in which the Journal uses that personal information. Mediterranea may collect and use personal information that is necessary for the processing and publication of manuscripts submitted to us. This information may include names, affiliation and contact details; including postal address, emails, phone numbers and fax numbers.
Any personal information received by Mediterranea will only be used to:
– process and publish submitted manuscripts;
– communicate with authors and reviewers;
– manage the Journal website.
Following the recent GDPR European regulation, Mediterranea will never disclose personal information without consent from the author or reviewer. The editors will take reasonable technical and organisational precautions to prevent the loss, misuse or alteration of your personal information.