Code of Ethics for Journal Editors
“NAD-DIS” is an open-access peer-reviewed academic e-Journal, whose Code of Ethics is inspired by COPE’s (Committee on Publication Ethics) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. All the parties involved – authors, editors, referees – should be aware of the ethics requirements listed below.
Editorial principles
1. Accountability and responsibility for journal content
Journal's editors take responsibility for all works published on the Journal NAD-DIS. They strive to grant both scientific and editorial quality by double-blind peer review and careful editing. The journal maintains the integrity of the published record and grants long time preservation of all published content
2. Editorial independence and integrity
2.1 Independence of editorial decisions from commercial interests
NAD-DIS editors make their decisions about proposals submitted to the journal and published works on academic merit alone and take full responsibility for their decisions.
NAD-DIS embraces an open access policy and has no commercial interest, so the journal’s editorial processes and editors’ decisions are independent of any commercial consideration.
2.2 Editors’ relationship to the journal publisher
NAD-DIS’s editors work on a volunteer basis. The journal’s website is hosted by Milan Università degli Studi, a public institution which has a scientific research and teaching mission and does not interfere with NAD-DIS editors’ freedom of choice and activities, as long as their work is coherent with the scholarly mission of the journal.
2.3 Editors’ relationship to the journal publisher: Endogeny
The percentage of published research articles in which the author (or one of the authors) is a member of the Editorial Board or reviewer must not exceed 25% in the last two issues published.
Articles written by an author who is a member of the Editorial Board are guaranteed a review process in line with the Code of Ethics and free of conflicts of interest. An author's membership of journal boards is made explicit in the full-text or metadata of the article.
2.4 Journal metrics and decision-making
NAD-DIS’s editors do not attempt to influence the journal’s ranking by artificially increasing any journal metric. In particular, they strive to ensure that submitted papers are reviewed on purely scholarly grounds and that authors are not pressured to cite specific publications for non- scholarly reasons.
3. Editorial confidentiality
3.1 Authors’ material
NAD-DISselects papers to be published through double-blind peer review. Peer reviewers are chosen by editors, who strive to protect the confidentiality of authors’ material and remind reviewers to do so as well. Submitted papers are never shared with editors of other journals, unless with the authors’ agreement or in cases of alleged misconduct (see below). Editors do not give any indication of a paper’s status with thejournal to anyone other than the authors. NAD-DIS web-based submission system prevents unauthorised access. In the case of a misconduct investigation, it may be necessary to disclose material to third parties (e.g., an institutional investigation committee or other editors).
3.2 Reviewers
NAD-DIS selects papers to be published through double-blind peer review.
Therefore, reviewers’ identities are always protected, unless an alleged or suspected reviewer’s misconduct compels the journal to disclose the reviewer’s name to a third party.
General editorial policies
4. Encourage maximum transparency and good publishing ethics
NAD-DIS aims at granting authors, readers, reviewers, and all other parties involved maximum transparency and complete and honest reporting about its work.
4.1 Authorship and responsibility
All signing authors of works published on NAD-DIS take responsibility for the conduct and validity of their research and for what is written in their contributions. Authors acknowledge that all contents are published under a4.0 License Creative Commons ).
Should any authorship dispute arise, it will be resolved at the appropriate institutional level or through other appropriate independent bodies. NAD-DIS editors will then act on the findings, for example by correcting authorship in published works.
4.2 Conflicts of interest and role of the funding source
Authors are required to declare any relevant financial or non-financial conflict of interest at the moment they submit their papers for publication on NAD-DIS. Declarations of conflicting interests are published alongside the paper so that readers are informed about them.
4.3 Authors’ publishing ethics
NAD-DIS editors work to ensure that all published papers make a substantial new contribution to their field. They discourage ‘salami publications’ (i.e., publication of the minimum publishable unit of research), avoid duplicate or redundant publication unless it is fully declared and acceptable to all (e.g., publication in a different language with cross-referencing), and encourage authors to place their work in the context of previous work (i.e., to state why this work was necessary/done, what this work adds or why a replication of previous work was required, and what readers should take away from it).
4.4 Research data avalaibility
Authors are encouraged to make avalaible any data on which the research is based. Data can be made avalaible either through publication as Supplementary Files published together with the articles, or deposited in Data Repository, or be made avalaible upon request. Authors publishing with Milano University Press can deposit their data in the University’s Data Research Repository Dataverse. If data are avalaible upon request, interested researchers may contact the corresponding author to obtain access. To ensure compliance with ethical standards, data will only be shared after signing a disclosure agreement, which specifies the conditions of use and prohibits unauthorised dissemination.
4.5 Use of Artificial Intelligence
NAD-DIS acknowledges the importance of artificial intelligence innovations understanding the challenges and opportunities they entail. Authors who have used artificial intelligence tools in the editing of a manuscript, in the production of images or graphical elements of the article, or in the collection and analysis of data, are invited to explicitly declare their use, mentioning the AI tool, the field of application, the search queries used and the date of use, in order to allow reproducibility and verification. The author will remain responsible for the accuracy and correctness of any published content and guarantees compliance with the code of ethics and anti-plagiarism rules. Authors who have used AI, or AI-assisted tools, are required to include a paragraph at the end of their manuscript, entitled "Declaration on Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in the Writing Process", with the following information: "During the preparation of this paper the author(s) used [TOOL/SERVICE NAME] on [DD/MM/YYYYY] using the search terms: [SEARCH TERMS] in order to [REASON]. After using this tool/service, the author(s) have reviewed and edited the content as necessary and take full responsibility for the content of the publication." Editors are not allowed to upload received manuscripts into artificial intelligence software, in order not to risk compromising privacy and copyright.
4.6 Plagiarism Policy
NAD-DIS does not accept manuscripts with plagiarized material. For the purposes of this policy, plagiarism is defined as the use of previously authored works - including text, data, and images - of others or self without proper attribution. Editors are required to intervene promptly in the event of errors and incorrect behavior, whether confirmed or suspected. Whenever plagiarism is detected, both in published and unpublished papers or during the publication process, the corresponding author will be notified to apply the due changes and – if required – to withdraw the submission following the COPE (https://publicationethics.org/retraction-guidelines) recommendations and guidelines. Journal editors will respond to plagiarism at their discretion. Actions taken will be based on the severity of the plagiarism attempt but can include corrections to or retractions of the published article, the author being banned from publishing in the journal. Retracted papers will be retained online and will be prominently marked as retracted in all online versions, including the PDF, to ensure transparency to readers.
5. Responding to criticisms and concerns
NAD-DIS welcomes and encourages criticism and debate.
5.1 Ensuring integrity of the published record - corrections
When genuine errors in works published NAD-DIS are pointed out by readers, authors, or editors, which do not render the work invalid, a correction (or erratum) will be published as soon as possible. The paper will be corrected with a date of correction. If the error renders the work or substantial parts of it invalid, the paper will be retracted with an explanation as to the reason for retraction (i.e., honest error). Retracted papers will be retained online, and they will be prominently marked as a retraction in all online versions, including the PDF, for the benefit of future readers.
5.2 Ensuring the integrity of the published record – suspected research or publication misconduct
If serious concerns are raised by readers, reviewers, or others, about the conduct, validity, or reporting of works published on NAD-DIS, the editors of the journal will initially contact the authors and allow them to respond to the concerns. If that response is unsatisfactory, editors will take the matter to the appropriate institutional level. The editors of NAD-DIS will also do their best to respond to findings from research integrity organisations that indicate misconduct relating to works published on NAD-DIS. Editors can themselves decide to retract a paper if they are convinced that serious misconduct has happened even if an investigation by an institution or national body does not recommend it. Editors will respond to all allegations or suspicions of research or publication misconduct raised by readers, reviewers, or other editors. In general, they acknowledge collective responsibility for the research record of the journal and will act whenever they become aware of potential misconduct if at all possible.
5.3 Encourage scholarly debate
NAD-DIS welcomes readers’ criticisms to works published by the journal and will consider publishing them to foster scientific debate, as long as they are proposed in a timely manner. The authors of the original works will be given the opportunity to reply to further promote the debate. Any criticisms that raise the possibility of misconduct will be further investigated even if they are received a long time after publication.
6. Ensuring a fair and appropriate peer review process
NAD-DIS editors organize and use peer review fairly and wisely. The peer review processes is clearly explained in the information for authors' page on the journal's website, where it is also indicated which parts of the journal are peer reviewed.
6.1 Decision whether to review
NAD-DIS editors may reject a paper without peer review (desk-rejection) when it is deemed unsuitable for the journal’s readers or is of poor quality. This decision is made in a fair and unbiased way and the criteria used to make this decision are made explicit to the author. The decision not to send a paper for peer review is only based on the academic content of the paper, without regard to their gender, age, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or the political philosophy.
6.2 Interaction with peer reviewers
NAD-DIS editors use appropriate peer reviewers for papers that are considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest. NAD-DIS editors ensure that reviews are received in a timely manner. Peer reviewers are told what is expected of them and are informed about any changes in editorial policies. Peer reviewers are asked to assess research and publication ethics issues (i.e., whether they think the research was done and reported ethically, or if they have any suspicions of plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, or redundant publication). NAD-DIS editors have a policy to request a formal conflict of interest declaration from peer reviewers and ask peer reviewers to inform them about any such conflict of interest at the earliest opportunity so that they can make a decision on whether an unbiased review is possible. Certain conflicts of interest may disqualify a peer reviewer.
NAD-DIS editors stress confidentiality of the material to peer reviewers.
6.3 Reviewer misconduct
NAD-DIS editors take reviewer misconduct seriously and pursue any allegation of breach of confidentiality, non-declaration of conflicts of interest (financial or non-financial), inappropriate use of confidential material, or delay of peer review for competitive advantage. Allegations of serious reviewer misconduct, such as plagiarism, are taken to the institutional level.
6.4 Interaction with authors
NAD-DIS editors make it clear to authors that the role of the peer reviewer is to provide recommendations on acceptance or rejection. Correspondence from editors is usually with the corresponding author, who have the responsibility to involve co-authors at all stages. NAD-DISeditors communicate with all authors at first submission and at final acceptance stage to ensure all authors are aware of the submission and have approved the publication. Normally, NAD-DIS editors pass on all peer reviewers’ comments in their entirety. However, in exceptional cases, it may be necessary to exclude parts of a review, if it, for example, contains libellous or offensive remarks.
NAD-DIS editors guarantee that such editorial discretion is not inappropriately used to suppress inconvenient comments. Should there be good reasons to involve additional reviewers at a late stage in the process, it is clearly communicated to authors. The final editorial decision and reasons for this are clearly communicated to authors and reviewers. If a paper is rejected, NAD-DIS editors welcome appeals from authors. Editors, however, are not obliged to overturn their decision.
6.5 Use of Artificial Intelligence in peer-review process
Reviewers undertake not to use artificial intelligence tools to evaluate manuscripts in order to guarantee the application of critical thinking and original assessment, as required for this work.
7. Editorial decision-making
NAD-DIS editors guarantee that decisions on publications are as fair and unbiased as possible.
7.1 Editorial and journal processes
All editorial processes are made clear in the information for authors on the journal's webpage, where it is stated what is expected of authors, which types of papers are published, and how papers are handled by the journal. All editors are fully familiar with the journal policies, vision, and scope. The final responsibility for all decisions rests with the managing editor.
7.2 Editorial conflicts of interest
NAD-DIS editors are not involved in decisions about papers in which they have a conflict of interest, for example if they work or have worked in the same institution and collaborated with the authors, if they own stock in a particular company, or if they have a personal relationship with the authors. NAD-DIS has a process in place to handle papers submitted by editors or editorial board members to ensure unbiased and independent handling of such papers. This process is stated in the information for authors.
