This post is also available in: Español (Spanish)
CONGRES OF BIOETHICS-TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIETY CODE OF ETHICS
The Proceedings of the Bioethics, Technology and Society Congress, as a publication that seeks the highest international excellence, is inspired by the ethical code of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
Data originality and fidelity:
The authors of the original papers submitted to the Bioethics, Technology and Society Congress attest that the work is original, unpublished and that it does not contain parts of other authors or other fragments of papers already published by the authors. In addition, they confirm the veracity of the data, i.e., that the empirical data have not been altered to verify hypotheses.
Multiple and/or repetitive publications:
The author should not publish articles in which the same results are repeated in more than one scientific journal or any other non-academic publication. Simultaneous submission of the same contribution to multiple scientific journals is considered an ethically incorrect and reprehensible practice.
Attributions, quotations and references:
The author must always provide the correct indication of the sources and contributions mentioned in the article.
The authors guarantee the inclusion of those people who have made a meaningful scientific and intellectual contribution in the conceptualization and planning of the work as well as in the interpretation of the results and in the writing of the paper. At the same time, the order of appearance of the authors has been ranked according to their level of responsibility and involvement.
Access and Retention:
If the members of the Editorial Board see it appropriate, authors of articles should also make available the sources or data on which the research is based, which may be retained for a reasonable period of time after publication and possibly become accessible.
Conflict of interest and disclosure:
All authors are required to explicitly state that there are no conflicts of interest that may have influenced the results obtained or interpretations proposed. Authors must also indicate any funding from agencies and/or projects from which the research article arises.
Errors in published articles:
When an author identifies a major error or inaccuracy in his or her article, he or she should immediately inform the journal editors and provide them with all the necessary information in order to list the relevant corrections at the bottom the article (always in Marginal Note, so the publication is not altered).
The responsibility for the content of the articles published in the Bioethics, Technology and Society Congress is exclusive to the authors. The authors also commit to carry out a review of the most current and relevant scientific literature on the analyzed subject, considering the different trends of knowledge in a pluralistic manner.
Contribution to editorial decisions:
Peer review is a procedure that helps editors make decisions on proposed articles and also allows authors to improve the quality of articles submitted for publication. The reviewers perform a critical, honest, constructive, and unbiased review of both the scientific and literary quality of the writing in the field of their knowledge and skills.
Respect for review times:
A reviewer who does not feel competent in the subject matter to be reviewed or who is unable to complete the evaluation within the scheduled time must notify the editors immediately. Reviewers are committed to evaluate manuscripts in the shortest possible time in order to respect deadlines.
Each assigned manuscript is considered confidential. Therefore, these texts should not be discussed with others without consent of the editors.
Peer review must be conducted in an objective manner. Reviewers must give sufficient reasons for each of their assessments by always using the review template. Reviewers will submit a complete critical report with appropriate references in accordance with the review protocol of the Bioethics, Technology and Society Congress and the public regulations for reviewers; especially if the paper is proposed for rejection. They are required to inform the editors if substantial parts of the paper have already been published or are being reviewed for another publication.
Reviewers commit to accurately indicate bibliographic references of fundamental works possibly overlooked by the author. Reviewers must also inform the editors of any similarity or overlap of the manuscript with other published works.
In order to ensure that the review process is as objective, unbiased, and transparent as possible, the identity of authors is removed before articles are submitted for peer review. If, for any reason, the identity of authors, their institutional affiliations, or any other information that jeopardizes the anonymity of the paper has been compromised, the reviewer must notify the editors immediately.
The editors will guarantee the selection of the most scientifically qualified reviewers and specialists to express a critical and expert appreciation of the paper, with the least possible biases. The Bioethics, Technology and Society Congress chooses to select between 2 and 4 reviewers for each paper in order to ensure greater objectivity in the review process.
Editors evaluate articles submitted for publication on the basis of the scientific merit of the content, without discrimination of race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, ethnic origin, nationality, or political opinion of the authors.
The editors and members of the working group agree not to disclose information related to articles submitted for publication to people other than authors, reviewers, and editors. The editors and the Editorial Committee are committed to the confidentiality of the manuscripts, their authors, and reviewers, so that anonymity preserves the intellectual integrity of the entire process.
Conflict of interest and disclosure:
Editors agree not to use in their research the content of articles submitted for publication without the written consent of the author.
Compliance for deadlines:
The editors are responsible for meeting the time limits for review and publication of accepted papers, to ensure prompt dissemination of their results. They commit to comply with the published deadlines (maximum 60 days in the estimation / rejection from the receipt of the manuscript in the Review Platform) and a maximum of 150 days from the start of the scientific review process by experts).