Publishing Ethics
Responsibilities of Reviewers
Contribution to the editorial decision: peer review is a procedure that helps editors to make decisions on the proposed articles and also allows the author to improve the contribution submitted for publication. The reviewers are committed to performing a critical, honest, constructive, and unbiased review of both the scientific and the literary quality of the written work, i.e. based on their individual skills and knowledge.
Respect of time: the reviewer who does not feel adequate to the task proposed or who are not able to finish the evaluation of the proposed contribution in the scheduled time is required to promptly notify the coordinators. The reviewers are committed to evaluating the works in the minimum possible time so as to respect the stated deadlines, i.e. given that Media Education’s policy for holding pending documents is limited and restricted for the purpose of respecting authors and their works.
Confidentiality: each assigned reading manuscript should be considered as confidential. Therefore, these texts should not be discussed with other people without the explicit permission of the editors.
Objectivity: the peer-review must be conducted in an objective manner. Any personal judgment about the authors of contributions is considered inappropriate. The reviewers are required to give adequate reasons for their judgments. The reviewers will submit a complete and critical report with adequate references according to Media Education’s review protocol and the established public norms for reviewers, especially if it suggested the rejection of the article. They are obliged, moreover, to advise the editors whether substantial sections of the work have been previously published, or if they are being revised by another publication.
Text display: the reviewers undertake to accurately indicate the bibliographical references of fundamental works possibly neglected by the author. The reviewer must also report to the editors any similarities or overlaps between the text received and other works known to her/him.
Conflict of interest and disclosure: confidential information or information obtained during the peer-review process must be considered confidential and may not be used for personal purposes. The reviewer will not accept in reading articles for which there is a conflict of interest due to previous collaboration or competition with the author and /or his/her institution.
Responsibilities of editors
- Decisions on publication: The editors ensure the selection of the most qualified reviewers and scientifically specialists to issue an expert and critical appreciation of the manuscript, with the least possible level of bias. “Media Education” opts to select between 2 and 4 reviewers for each manuscript so as to ensure a greater objectivity in the revision process.
- Honesty: the editors evaluate the articles submitted for publication only on the basis of the scientific merit of the content, without discrimination of race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, ethnicity, nationality, political opinion of the authors.
- Confidentiality: the editors and members of the working group undertake not to disclose information relating to the articles submitted for publication to other people other than the author, the reviewers and the editor. Editors and the Editorial Committee are committed to maintaining the confidentiality of the manuscripts, their authors and their reviewers, in such a way that anonymity preserves the intellectual integrity of the whole process.
- Conflict of interest and disclosure: the editors undertake not to use in their research content of articles submitted for publication without the written consent of the author.
Retractions and publishing malpractices
All corrections, expressions of concern and retraction notices are free to access at the point of publication. The editors will be guided by COPE’s Guidelines for Retracting Articles when considering retracting, issuing an expressions of concern about, and issuing corrections pertaining to articles that have been published in “Media Education”. They are committed to working closely with research organizations and institutions in line with COPE’s advice on Cooperation between Research Institutions and Journals on Research Integrity Cases.
Ethical standards for publication exist to ensure high-quality scientific publications, public trust in scientific findings, and that people receive credit for their ideas. It is important to avoid:
- Data fabrication and falsification:
Data fabrication means that the researcher did not actually perform the study but instead made up data. Data falsification means that the researcher did the experiment, but then changed some of the data. Both of these practices make people distrust scientists. If the public is mistrustful of science, then it will be less willing to provide funding support.
- Plagiarism:
Taking the ideas and work of others without giving them credit is unfair and dishonest. Copying even from one sentence from someone else’s manuscript, or even one of your own that has previously been published, without proper citation is considered plagiarism—use your own words instead.
- Multiple submissions:
It is unethical to submit the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time. Doing this wastes the time of editors and peer reviewers, and can damage the reputation of journals if published in more than one.
- Redundant publications (or ‘salami’ publications):
This means publishing many very similar manuscripts based on the same experiment. It can make readers less likely to pay attention to your manuscripts.
- Improper author contribution or attribution:
All of the listed authors must have made a significant scientific contribution to the research in the manuscript and have approved all its claims. Do not forget to list everyone who made a significant scientific contribution, including students and laboratory technicians.