Ethical and best practices statement

The quality standards for scientific journals require the inclusion, within their general criteria, of a statement of good publication practices to which the Editor, Editorial Board, reviewers and authors must adhere.

Carthaginensia is based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Guidelines for the Editor, Editorial Board, reviewers and authors.

1. Obligations of the Editor / Editor-in-Chief
Carthaginensia is governed by the ethical basis inspired by COPE Core Practices and Guidelines (2017). These guidelines apply to all those involved in the publication of the journal: editors and their journals, publishers and institutions. The COPE Core Practices will be taken into account in conjunction with national and international codes of conduct specific to research, which they are not intended to replace.

Responsibility: The Editor is responsible for the decision whether or not to publish the articles received. He is also responsible for any other content published in his journal. To this end, he/she shall ensure that articles are reviewed by experts in the field.

In making these decisions, the Editor should be guided both by the policies of the journal's Editorial Board and by legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The Editor may consult with other members of the Editorial Board or reviewers in making publication decisions.

Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI): The Editor is responsible for ensuring that the editing, authoring, and review processes leading to publication incorporate good practices and ethical, responsible, and transparent behavior by all parties involved. This includes the use of AI during the editing process.

Carthaginensia's editing and authoring processes will never rely on AI, whose use will be restricted to being a support tool that streamlines or makes these processes more efficient. The Editor will ensure that authors and members of the Editorial Board provide adequate information on their use of AI. Reviewers may not resort to the use of AI to evaluate manuscripts (see below).

Warning: in none of the editing, authoring and review processes, manuscripts received for evaluation can be uploaded (neither totally nor partially) into an AI application, as their content could potentially become part of the training data. Confidential information would be shared and the authors' intellectual property rights would be violated.

Journal Management: The Editor will work together with a diverse and effective Editorial Board.

He/she will communicate regularly with all members with decision-making power over the journal and meet with them as often as necessary (virtually if necessary).

Actively involve Editorial Board members in the peer review process when appropriate.

Data access and preservation: the Editor may request authors to provide the original data related to a peer-reviewed paper. In any case, authors must be willing to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Fairness: During the evaluation process the Editor will have to evaluate only the scientific content of the articles, without letting aspects related to race, gender, religious beliefs, citizenship, ethnicity or political philosophy of the authors affect their decisions. It will avoid any bias in making editorial decisions.

Equity: During the evaluation process, the Editor will have to evaluate only the scientific content of the articles, without letting aspects related to race, gender, religious beliefs, citizenship, ethnicity or political philosophy of the authors affect his/her decisions. It will avoid any bias in editorial decision-making.

Authorship: The Editor declines any responsibility for possible conflicts arising from the authorship of papers published in the journal.

The ideas, data and opinions expressed in the published papers will be the sole responsibility of the authors, who are also responsible for obtaining the corresponding permissions for publication, that the published papers are carried out in accordance with the ethical criteria that govern research and that they are in accordance with professional ethics.

Confidentiality: The Editor and other members of the Editorial Board may only share information regarding submitted manuscripts with the author, reviewers, potential reviewers, and others involved in the publication process.

Intellectual Property: Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript should not be used in the Editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Similarly, privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review should be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.

Inclusive language: Carthaginensia adheres to the United Nations goal of “expressing oneself orally and in writing without discriminating against any particular sex, social gender or gender identity and without perpetuating gender stereotypes” (https://www.un.org/es/gender-inclusive-language/index.shtml).

This objective must be compatible with “other discursive or pragmatic postulates, such as equivalence, appropriateness, convenience, aesthetics and, in particular, the principle of economy” (Position of the Royal Spanish Academy (RAE) of January 16, 2020, § 8.1), and also with respect for the linguistic system.

It is recommended to take into account the guidelines of the aforementioned United Nations website and the report and other publications of the Royal Spanish Academy (https://www.rae.es/sites/default/files/Informe_lenguaje_inclusivo.pdf).

Peer review processes: The Editor should try to ensure a fair and appropriate peer review process. Editors should refrain (i.e., should ask a co-editor, associate editor, or other Editorial Board member to do the review in their place) from reviewing manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions (possibly) related to the articles.

Post-publication discussions and corrections: The Editor should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are disclosed after publication. If necessary, other appropriate action, such as publication of a retraction or note of clarification, should be taken.

Misconduct: In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, such as copyright infringement, fraudulent publication, plagiarism or self-plagiarism, the Publisher, in close collaboration with the journal editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and modify the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of a note of clarification, in the most severe cases, the complete retraction of the work concerned.

In case of possible retraction, the Editor shall be guided by the COPE Article Retraction Guidelines.

In case of infringement of rights, the author shall be solely responsible for the consequences.

In cases of defamation and plagiarism, the Editor will reject the received papers.

In case of self-plagiarism, each case will be considered on a case-by-case basis. A decision will be made on the basis of the amount of reused text, its nature - original research or not - the original source and the copyright. The decision will be supported by the COPE Text recycling guidelines.

Complaints and claims: Carthaginensia will respond to all complaints or suspicions of research or publication misconduct raised by readers, reviewers, or other editors. The Editor will take reasonable action when ethical complaints are raised in connection with a submitted manuscript or published article. The journal will evaluate cases of possible plagiarism or duplicate/redundant publication related to a submitted manuscript or published article.

In other cases - editorial (Publisher) or reviewer misconduct - the journal may request an investigation by the institution itself or other appropriate bodies. Each reported act of unethical behavior will be investigated, even if it is discovered years after publication.

In other cases - editorial (Publisher) or reviewer misconduct - the journal may request an investigation by the institution itself or other appropriate bodies. Every reported act of unethical behavior will be investigated, even if it is discovered years after publication.

Participation and cooperation in investigations: the Editor should maintain the integrity of the scholarly record, prevent commercial needs from compromising intellectual and ethical standards, and always be ready to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies when necessary.

2. Obligations of reviewers
Contribution to the editorial decision: the publication of an article in the Carthaginensia journal involves a double-blind peer review system. The reviewers will assist the Editorial Board in editorial decisions and will collaborate with the author to improve his/her work, if necessary.

Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI): Scripta Theologicsa does not endorse the use of AI in the review process. Reviewers may not resort to the use of AI to evaluate manuscripts.

Caveat: Manuscripts received for evaluation may not be uploaded (in whole or in part) into an AI application to supplement the review process, as their content could potentially become part of the training data. Confidential information would be shared and the intellectual property rights of the authors would be violated.

Qualification and timeliness: any reviewer selected must state whether he/she is qualified to review the proposed article and, if so, to deliver the review on time.

Confidentiality: any manuscript received by the reviewer should be treated as a confidential document. It should not be shown or discussed with anyone, unless authorized by the Editorial Board.

Standards of objectivity and respect: evaluations should be carried out with total objectivity and using language that is respectful of the author and the work: personal criticism of the author is always inappropriate. Evaluators should express their reviews clearly and provide arguments.

Acknowledgement of sources: when possible, reviewers should identify relevant publications that have not been cited by the authors. Reviewers should advise the Editor of any substantial similarity between the manuscript and any other publication of which they are aware.

Conflict of interest: privileged information obtained in the review process should be considered confidential and should not be used for personal gain. Reviewers may not evaluate manuscripts that are in conflict of interest due to competitiveness, collaboration or other relationships of connection with the authors, companies or institutions linked to the article in question.

Misconduct: reviewers should avoid situations of citation coercion, suggesting to authors citations to the journal in the reviewed articles; alteration of their own anonymity in double-blind peer review; any type of predatory practices, such as the use of false names, demand for payment and false review; and simulated coordination of monographs, cases in which the journal does not allow the coordinator of a volume to review or decide which texts will be published, producing a “use” of the identity and academic prestige of the coordinator.

3. Obligations of the authors
Rules for the presentation of articles: authors must present original articles of scientific rigor. They should also present an accurate description of the work performed, as well as an objective discussion of its importance. The underlying data should be accurately represented in the manuscript. The work must contain sufficient references to allow the reviewers to carry out their replications. Overt fraud constitutes unethical behavior and is unacceptable.

Personal data: authors must provide their contact information to be used during the evaluation process and, if necessary, for the publication of the article. They will not be provided to third parties or for use for other purposes.

Originality and plagiarism: authors undertake to submit original papers and to cite appropriately, in accordance with the journal's rules, the work of other authors.

To detect possible plagiarism, submitted papers will be analyzed with the Turnitin anti-plagiarism tool before being sent to reviewers.

Multiple or redundant publications: as a general rule, authors may not publish articles that contain results already published in other works. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time is unacceptable behavior that violates the ethics of the procedure.

Acknowledgement of sources: authors should provide an appropriate acknowledgement of the bibliographic sources that have made possible the preparation of their work.

In the case of use of an observation, derivation or argument that has been previously reported, the author must accompany it with the corresponding citation.

Authors who use artificial intelligence tools in the writing of a manuscript, the production of images or graphical elements of the article, or in data collection and analysis, should be transparent and state how it was used and which tool was used. Authors are fully responsible for the content of their manuscript, even those parts produced by an artificial intelligence tool.

Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI): Authors who use Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the writing of a manuscript must be transparent and declare how and in which parts of the text it was used, and which tool was used, always in accordance with the recommendations for use and citation present in the Guidelines for Authors.

Warning: Once the manuscript has been written, it cannot be uploaded (in whole or in part) to an AI application to complement the review process, as its content could potentially become part of the training data. Confidential information would be shared - the manuscript would no longer be original - and the author's intellectual property rights would be violated.

Authors are fully responsible for the content of their manuscript, even those parts produced by an artificial intelligence tool.

Authorship of a manuscript and contribution: authorship will be limited to those persons who have taken part in the gestation, design and execution of the work.

All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. When there are other persons who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be named in an acknowledgements section.

The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate (as defined above) and no inappropriate co-authors are listed as authors on the manuscript, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Artificial intelligence tools cannot be listed as the author of an article. They do not meet the requirements for authorship, as they cannot assume responsibility for an article. They lack legal personality, and cannot assert the presence and absence of conflicts of interest or manage copyright contracts.

Conflict of interest: every author shall disclose in his/her manuscript any financial or other conflict of interest that could affect the results or their interpretation and consequently the evaluation of his/her work (e.g. employment, consultancies, property rights, fees, testimonials of contracted experts, patent applications/registrations and grants or other funds).

Sources of funding: every author shall mention the sources of funding for the project that gave rise to the article.

Fundamental errors in published work: when an author discovers a significant error in his/her published work, it is his/her obligation to promptly communicate this fact to the Editor of the journal and cooperate with him/her in the withdrawal or correction of the article.

Statement of good practice in gender equality

The journal recommends the use of inclusive language in articles submitted for publication, provided that the orthographic norms of the original language of the article are not transgressed. The reviewers will be informed of this criterion so that they can take it into account in their reports. Similarly, reviewers will be informed of the author's gender.

Likewise, Carthaginensia promotes the presence of women in its Editorial Board and Scientific Committee, as well as among the evaluators, with the intention of covering at least 40%.

Carthaginensia publishes the full name of all collaborators and identifies the gender when requesting evaluations.