Submissions guidelines

Quaderns de filosofia (València, ISSN 2341-1414, eISSN 2341-3042) is an academic journal for professionals of philosophy which publishes original articles of scientific quality with a strong commitment to compliance with the best principles of transparency and best practices. 

Therefore, Quaderns de filosofia has a Code of Ethics based on the principles of The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) with the guidelines of the best practices on ethical conduct to be followed by editors, reviewers and authors.

1.     Editors 

1.1.         Responsibility

Inhouse editors are who firstly review any paper submitted and if proposals are suitable for consideration for Quaderns de filosofia, then are sent it to the reviewers.

In order to provide the maximum benefit to the scientific community in the philosophical discipline, editors have the professional responsibility to ensure high quality standards and basic ethical commitments in the whole process. 

1.2.         Impartiality

For this goal, editors have to coordinate the relations between to all members of the magazine and inform the authors and evaluators regarding impartiality, and also the honesty, responsibility, confidentiality that must preside over the tasks that correspond to them.

Editors must exercise their position in a constructive and sensitive manner by evaluating manuscripts solely for academic quality, regardless of political, religious, financial or personal preferences.

1.3.         Complains and Appeals

According to the Complains and Appeals guidelines of the Quaderns de filosofia, editors must deal with any concerns and wish to appeal or file a complaint sent to quadfia@uv.es

Editors must also ensure the quality of the published work by publishing corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when necessary.

1.4.         Disagreements

If there are disagreements related to the authorship or its order during the journal process, article will be not published until this issue is resolved. Editors are not responsible for disputes or disagreements regarding the authorship of a manuscript. Following COPE Guidelines on Good Publication Practice, it is helpful to decide the authorship early on in the planning of a research project.

 2.     Reviewers

2.1.         Responsibility

Reviewers contacted by the editorial board of Quaderns de filosofia must agree to review only if they have the necessary expertise to assess the manuscript and can be unbiased in your assessment. It is better to identify clearly any gaps when asked to review.

2.2.         Acceptation or rejection

Editors only can accept or reject an article for publication according to the paper’s importance, relevance, originality and clarity. According to the Principles of Transparency and Best Practices of Quaderns de filosofia, any decision must first be reported to the Editorial Team of Quaderns de filosofia, who will then notify the authors.

2.3.         Confidenciality in the peer-review process

On the one hand, reviewers must not take evaluate manuscripts in which there is any reference to the identity of the author. In such cases, they must immediately inform the editor, who must send the paper to another reviewer. On the other hand, reviewers must eliminate any reference that identifies when they send evaluations to the author. Do not contact the authors directly without the permission of the journal.

2.4.         Competing or conflicting interests

Reviewers should declare all potential competing, or conflicting, interest at the personal, financial, political or religious level. Besides, at the intellectual and professional level, reviewers must not agree to review a paper just to gain sight of it with no intention of submitting a review, or agree to review a paper that is very similar to one you are already working.

2.5.         Timeline

Quaderns de filosofia does not seek any additional revenue and does not allow any kind of advertising content in the platform. The journal is funded entirely through the Societat de Filosofia del País Valencià. Hence, reviewers are not paid by their work. However, reviewers should respond to an invitation to peer review within a reasonable time frame. If reviewers cannot do it, it is helpful to inform the journal as soon as possible and make suggestions for alternative reviewers if relevant. 

3.     Authors

3.1.         Responsibility

3.1.1.     Authors can only submit manuscripts with which they have a precise relationship to the research carried out. It is expected that authors assume responsibility for all poured information into the text.

The manuscript content must be duly quoted and referenced, and treated with academic rigour. Any statement or fact presented in a way that is fraudulent or imprecise constitutes unacceptable behaviour.

3.1.2.     To avoid disputes over attribution of academic credit, Quaderns de filosofia recommend to decide early on in the planning of a research project who will be credited as authors, as contributors, and who just will be acknowledged.

3.1.3.     Authors must reply to the reviewers and editors as soon as possible in a clear, simple and professionally way to the comments about their work.

3.2.         Transparency

3.2.1.     Before sending their works, authors must ensure they have the permission, license or certification for data or analysis taken from any source other than their own authorship. In this case, they must quote such information in a respectful and academically correct mode.

3.2.2.     Authors must send at the submission time their relevant information to increase transparency in authorship (for example, by sending their ORCID).

3.3.         Originality

3.3.1.     Authors must ensure the originality of their papers and guarantee that they have not published or submitted the same work in any other journal and in any other language.

3.3.2.     Authors should minimize self-citations in their articles submitted to Quaderns de filosofia. If necessary, self-citations must appear without indicating the name of the authors in the manuscript.

3.4.         Peer-review process

3.4.1.     Authors should not include in their manuscript any personal (or other) references that could identify them. Anonymous relationships between evaluator and author must be respected at all times.

3.4.2.     Authors must reply to the reviewers comments in a responsible and respectful manner and accept the final decision made by the editors regarding the acceptance or rejection of a manuscript.