Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Mètode Science Studies Journal - Annual Review (ISSN 2174-3487 - eISSN 2174-9221) is a peer-reviewed journal that publishes original research, commentary and analysis on current research and science communication. The online version of the journal updates its content quarterly. Articles published in the online version are also collected in the printed Annual Review of the magazine. We accept articles on all fields of science, which undergo a double-blind peer review quality process.

 

Section Policies

Op-Ed articles

Unchecked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Documentary texts

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Dossiers

Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Monographs

Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

Works submitted to the indexed sections (Mongraphs, Dossiers and Documentary texts) will undergo a peer review evaluation process.

The works sent to be included in the peer reviewed sections will be first reviewed by members of the editorial staff, or by members of the advisory board, who will check that the texts do meet the author guidelines and consider its suitability for the journal.

Should the articles meet the author guidelines, the texts are sent to external reviewers —whose identity will remain anonymous— who might approve them, ask for changes or reject them. Should the article be rejected only by one of the reviewers, a third reviewer will evaluate the article.

 

Open Access Policy

This is an open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Texts in the journal are published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the BOAI definition of open access.

 

Ethical Code

Content quality and rigour are the two fundamental aspects of Mètode Science Studies Journal. Therefore, the journal believes it is essential to ensure that the process of evaluation and publication of papers depends on a transparent process, supported by independent reviewers.

Mètode promises to keep the following ethical rules during every stage of the publication process, following the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). We present Mètode’s good practice ethical code, concerning the different individuals and stages of the publication process.

Editor’s Responsibilities

The editors promise:

  1. To ensure the quality of the content in the journal. To certify that the acceptance of papers depends only to the academic merit of the text.
  2. To act objectively and without discrimination towards the author’s origin, place of work, gender, sexual orientation or religious or political beliefs.
  3. To keep the review process confidential, and assure the anonymity of the author during the whole process until the publication of the paper, as well as the anonymity of the reviewers during the process of evaluation and afterwards.
  4. To guarantee that the content is original and has not been previously published. The journal uses specific software to detect any possible plagiarism. In case plagiarism is detected during the revision process, the paper will be automatically rejected.
  5. To pay attention to complaints from the authors and to justified conflicts regarding editorial decisions. Complaints will be dealt with as soon as possible.
  6. To offer the opportunity to the authors to answer any complaint about them. Any documents referring to complaints will be stored.
  7. To promote the correction or removal of a paper if necessary.

Reviewers' Responsibilities

  1. After receiving the invitation by the editor to review the article, reviewers may accept only if they think the are qualified to carry out the revision. They commit to delivering it within the indicated deadline.
  2. The reviewers commit to evaluate the manuscripts objectively in order to improve the quality of the content in the journal. If the reviewers think they cannot carry out the review objectively –because of meddling economic, academic or personal interests–, they must inform the editor, renouncing to the review if necessary.
  3. The reviewers cannot use information obtained during the evaluation process in their own benefit or to discredit others.
  4. The comments of the reviewers must be constructive and respect the intellectual and academic capacity of the author. Mètode reserves the right to edit comments if they can be considered disrespectful or harmful towards the authors.
  5. The reviewers must inform about the most relevant works in the field that are nor cited in the paper.
  6. The review process is anonymous. The reviewers must adhere to confidentiality during and after the review. The reviewers shall destroy the review documents after the evaluation of the paper.
  7. The reviewers must inform the editor if they have already assessed the paper for a different journal, in which case they shall renounce to the review.
  8. The reviewers must inform the editor if they detect content that is substantially similar to another paper undergoing the review process o to previously published content.

Authors' Responsibilities

  1. The authors ensure that the paper is original and not being reviewed for other publications.
  2. All the authors signing the paper must have contributed to research.
  3. The authors ensure that all the data in the paper is real.
  4. The authors must keep a copy of all the data associated with the paper and share it with institutions or researchers that are interested in the matter.
  5. The authors are responsible for asking for permission to publish any non-original additional material (figures, tables, pictures...) and provide the source to the editors, and always make sure that the material is royalty-free.
  6. The authors must specify if the research received private or public funding of any kind, and declare any potential conflict of interest.
  7. The authors shall also notify the editor about any error detected in the article. Likewise, they must cooperate with its correction in an erratum, addendum or, if necessary, with the retraction of the paper.

Dealing with Unethical Behaviour

  1. Any person can inform the editor of unethical conduct. The journal will pay attention to every claim, regardless of the time of the original publication. Allegations must be supported by evidence so the publication can initiate an investigation.
  2. All the complaints and allegations against unethical conduct or misbehaviour will be taken with the utmost seriousness.
  3. Firstly, the author will be given the opportunity to answer the submitted allegations.
  4. In the event of serious misconduct, if the author’s answers are not satisfactory, the editor can extend the investigation by referring to a limited group of experts in the field.
  5. In any case, the editor will persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem.
  6. If the paper is found to be fraudulent after the appropriate investigation, it will be retracted in an identifiable way from the journal and from the indexes.

 

Indexing

Mètode journal is included in the following indexes and databases.


Evaluation, Identification and Impact Platforms for Scientific Journals

Scopus. Database of peer-reviewed literature.

Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI). A Thomson Reuters index for publications of regional interest and in emergence fields.

ERIH PLUS. European Reference Index for the Humanities and the Social Sciences.

REDIB. Open Access Platform for Spanish and Latin-American Electronic Science Journals.

Latindex. Online Regional Information System for scientific journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal.

Redalyc. Online system for scientific journals from Latin American, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal. 

MIAR. Information Matrix for the Analysis of Journals.

 

Directory of periodical publications

Dialnet. Hispanic Scientific Production Diffusion Portal (University of La Rioja).

 

Directories of open access journals

DOAJ. Directory of Open Access Journals.

Dulcinea. Copyright and self-archiving database for Spanish science journals.

Sherpa-Romeo . Open access database, created by the Centre for Research Communications of the University of Nottingham (UK).

Research Bible. Resource database for science journals.

 

Collective Catalogues and Library networks

Biblioteca Nacional de España. Collective catalogue of periodicals.

CCUC. Collective catalogue of the universities of Catalonia.

Library of Congress. USA Congress Library Catalogue.

REBIUN. Collective catalogue of the University Libraries Network of the Rector Congress of Spanish Universities (CRUE).

SUDOC. Resource catalogue of university libraries of France.

World Cat-OAIster. World network of content for libraries.

ZDB. Resource catalogue of university libraries of Germany.




Creative Commons License
Texts in the journal are –unless otherwise indicated– published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________