Registrazione presso il Tribunale di Palermo n. 3, 27/01/1984.
Double-blind peer review
Publication ethics and malpractice statement – Aesthetica Preprint
Aesthetica Preprint is a peer reviewed international journal committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics.
These guidelines are based on existing Elsevier policies and COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors
1. PUBLICATION AND AUTHORSHIP
The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behaviour for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society.
Authors need to ensure that the submitted article is the work of the submitting author(s) and is not plagiarized, wholly or in part. They must also make sure that the submitted article is original, is not wholly or in part a re-publication of the author’s earlier work, and contains no fraudulent data.
It is also their responsibility to check that all copyrighted material within the article has permission for publication and that material for which the author does not personally hold copyright is not reproduced without permission.
Finally, authors should ensure that the manuscript submitted is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere.
2. AUTHOR’S RESPONSIBILITIES
Aesthetica Preprint is a peer-reviewed journal, and Authors are obliged to participate in our double blind peer review process.
Authors need to ensure that all data in the submitted article are real and authentic. They must make sure that all authors have significantly contributed to the research submitted in the article, and that all and only the contributors to the article are listed as authors. It is their responsibility to ensure that no participants are harmed, physically or mentally, during the research which results in the article, and that personal details of the participants, where participants have not agreed for such details to be released or where the release of such details could endanger a participant, are fully anonymized. This applies both to textual citations and to images and any supplementary audio or visual material. Authors should also ensure that all authors provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.
3. PEER REVIEW AND REVIEWERS’ RESPONSIBILITIES
Both the referee and the author remain anonymous throughout the “blind” review process. Referees are selected according to their expertise in their particular fields.
Referees have a responsibility to be objective in their judgments; to have no conflict of interest with respect to the research, with respect to the authors and/or with respect to the research funders; to point out relevant published work which is not yet cited by the author(s); and to treat the reviewed articles confidentially.
4. EDITORIAL RESPONSIBILITIES
Editors hold full authority to reject/accept an article; to accept a paper only when reasonably certain; to promote publication of corrections or retractions when errors are found; to preserve anonymity of reviewers; and to have no conflict of interest with respect to articles they reject/accept. If an Editor feels that there is likely to be a perception of a conflict of interest in relation to their handling of a submission, they will declare it to the other Editors. The other Editors will select referees and make all decisions on the paper.
5. PUBLISHING ETHICS ISSUES
Members of the Editorial Board ensure the monitoring and safeguarding of the publishing ethics. This comprises the strict policy on plagiarism and fraudulent data, the strong commitment to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed, and the strict preclusion of business needs from compromising intellectual and ethical standards.
Whenever it is recognized that a published paper contains a significant inaccuracy, misleading statement or distorted report, it will be corrected promptly. If, after an appropriate investigation, an item proves to be fraudulent, it will be retracted. The retraction will be clearly identifiable to readers and indexing systems.
La rivista attualmente è presente nell'elenco delle riviste di classe A per le aree 10 e 11 dell'Agenzia Nazionale di Valutazione del Sistema Universitario e della Ricerca (ANVUR) ai fini dell'Abilitazione Scientifica Nazionale.
Università Roma Tre