The inTRAlinea Ethical Code
inTRAlinea is the online translation journal of the Department of Interpreting and Translation (DIT) of the University of Bologna, Italy.
ISSN: 1827-000X
Italian state authorization: n.7465 - 30/09/2004 - Bologna
Objectives
The purpose of our journal is to publish high quality international academic research on any translation-related subject, as well as reviews, debates, special monographs and translations. It is also our aim to foster the growth of Translation Studies as a disciplinary area by providing authors with fair and constructive feedback on their research, even when we are not able to publish it.
Online and open access
We are an online journal only. All our content is open-access to allow maximum distribution and can be freely cited, downloaded, and distributed in line with our Creative Commons License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0).
Copyright
In line with our non-commercial, open-access policy, authors retain unrestricted copyright and publishing rights over their contributions. We do ask that, in the event of a contribution being re-published in another venue, an acknowledgement of the original publication in this journal be included. All content is governed by our Creative Commons License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0).
Standards
inTRAlinea adopts an Ethical Code inspired by the Best Practice Guidelines promoted by COPE – Committee on Publication Ethics ([url=http://publicationethics.org/]http://publicationethics.org/[/url]).
All parties involved in the publication of the journal (editors, guest-editors, board members, authors and reviewers) are invited to familiarize themselves with this document. Collaboration with the journal, and submitting research to it for publication, automatically implies acceptance of the Ethical Code it contains.
1. Duties of the Editors, Guest-editors and Editorial board members
1.1 Publication decision
All published research articles and review articles undergo a double-blind peer review process.
All submissions are given a preliminary evaluation by the Editorial Board.
- If the submission is not approved, the author is sent a brief evaluation report compiled by the Board.
- If the submission is approved, the author is informed and it is passed on for peer review by at least two external referees.
Referees are chosen by the Editors/Guest-editors on the basis of their familiarity with the subject and languages of the submission and are external to the Editorial Board.
The Editors reserve the right to refuse publication of an article that they feel does not meet the standards of the journal, even if it has been positively reviewed by the referees.
Short introductions, book reviews, translations and contributions to the “Debates” and “Monographs” sections are reviewed by the Editors or members of the Editorial board in a non-anonymous fashion.
1.2. Anonymity in the peer review process
All peer reviews are carried out on anonymized manuscripts – without exception. We use a double-blind refereeing system whereby the referee is also anonymous.
1.3 Fair play
All submissions are evaluated solely on the basis of the quality of their contents, without any reference to authors’ race, gender, religion, ethnic origin, nationality, sexual or political orientation, or academic affiliation.
1.4 Confidentiality
The Editors, Guest-editors and Editorial Board members will respect the confidentiality of authors at all times and will not reveal information about their submissions to anyone other than the referees involved in the peer review process.
1.5 Disclosure and conflicts of interest
The Editors, Guest-editors and Editorial Board members will respect the confidentiality of all submissions and will not exploit their contents in any way in their own research without prior written consent from the author.
All articles published in inTRAlinea by Editors, Guest-editors or members of the Editorial and Advisory Boards are subjected to the same rigorous double blind peer review process as those by external authors.
1.6 Arbitration and quality control
If authors feel that a peer review is unfair, or in any other situation where there is a dispute over the evaluation of an article, authors have the right to request a review from a third referee. The Editors’ retain the right to refuse publication if they believe the article does not meet the academic standards of the journal, regardless of the opinions of the referees.
The Editors monitor the quality of the peer reviews and will cease all collaboration with peer reviewers who do not respect the review procedure, who produce superficial or inadequate reviews, or who are guilty of being abusive towards the author.
2. Duties of reviewers
2.1 Contribution to editorial decision
The peer-review is a fundamental process that helps the Editors make an informed decision on the quality of a submission. It is also an important opportunity to provide fair and constructive feedback to young and new researchers to help them improve their work.
2.2. Promptness
Referees who feel that they are unable to respect the review deadline (normally 60 days) are requested to inform the Editors immediately.
2.3. Confidentiality
All submissions must be considered as confidential. Reviewers must not discuss the contents of submissions without explicit consent from the Editors.
2.4. Standards of objectivity
Peer reviews should be written in a fair and objective fashion. They should be carried out using the journal’s standard peer review form, unless the Editor has indicated otherwise. Any perceived weaknesses in the submission should be discussed in a respectful and constructive manner.
2.5 Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Reviewers must treat all information accessed during the peer review process with absolute confidentiality and this information cannot be used or exploited in any way.
If a reviewer identifies the author of an anonymous manuscript, he/she should inform the Editors immediately so that an alternative reviewer can be found.
If a reviewer senses a situation of potential conflict of interest with the author of an anonymous manuscript, he/she should inform the Editors immediately so that an alternative reviewer can be found.
3. Duties of authors
3.1. Originality and plagiarism
All submissions should be original and previously unpublished. All research used in the submission should be clearly cited.
All submissions are checked for signs of plagiarism. Authors guilty of plagiarism will be permanently banned from publishing in inTRAlinea.
3.2. Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication
We will only accept a single submission from any one author at a time, on the understanding that it has not been submitted to any other journal.
Multiple submissions will be rejected out of hand without any form of review.
Authors must commit to not publishing the same research in more than one journal.
3.3. Acknowledgement of sources
All sources and research used in the submission must be clearly and correctly indicated/cited using the journal stylesheet.
3.4. Authorship of the article
All those who collaborated in the preparation of an article must be clearly and fairly indicated and acknowledged.
3.5 Disclosure and conflicts of interest
When submitting their research for publication in inTRAlinea, authors are implicitly acknowledging that no conflict of interest has conditioned the results of this research and its interpretation.
Any financial and/or institutional support that the author has benefitted from in preparing the article should be properly acknowledged.
3.6. Fundamental errors
If authors should become aware of any errors in their article they should inform the Editors immediately.
Download a copy of this Ethical Code
