Code of Ethics

Responsibilities and duties of the journal

1. As the first filter in the editorial process, RESU‘s editors review the submitted article to confirm whether it falls within the journal’s domain of interests and meets its technical and stylistic requirements. If the article is deemed eligible, the editors then send it to expert reviewers, who are chosen for their knowledge and scholarship in the subject area, in order to gather their opinions and proposals. They in turn send their responses to the author. Once this process is complete, RESU schedules the article’s publication and starts the editing process.

2. RESU assumes responsibility for informing authors of the status of their submitted articles at every stage of the publishing process, as well as for advising them of decisions resulting from the first-filter assessment and the peer-review process.

3. RESU will provide written notification to authors during the following stages of the publication process:

  1. Reception of the manuscript.
  2. Initial decision to accept or reject after the first-round review.
  3. Results of the peer-review process.
  4. Pending publication status, once the article has been accepted for publication.
  5. Published status, at the moment of print and online publication.

4.  Publication in RESU depends exclusively on the following criteria:

  1. Affinity between the text and RESU’s topics of interest.
  2. Strict adherence of all manuscripts to the journal’s stylistic and technical requirements.
  3. The results of the peer-review process.
  4. Compliance with the changes and observations suggested by the peer-reviewers.

5. The author’s nationality, ethnicity, political beliefs or religion have no bearing on the editorial decisions of RESU. The decision to publish or reject an article will not be determined by any external factors or policies.

6. All manuscripts submitted by members of RESU’s editorial staff and reviewers will undergo the same evaluation and double-blind review process as manuscripts submitted by other authors.

7. Without exception, RESU will respect the review process established under its editorial guidelines.

8. In the event that an author disagrees with the results of the review process, RESU will request written arguments explaining the author’s position, which will in turn be submitted to the editorial committee for a final decision.

9. All members of the editorial committee and reviewers pledge not to incorporate into their own work any unpublished material included in articles submitted to RESU.

Responsibilities of the author

1. The author must guarantee that the article submitted to RESU is an unpublished original. All previously published articles will be rejected. Articles are considered to have been “published” when any of the following situations occur:

  1. When the text has previously been published in its entirety.
  2. When it includes extensive portions that have been previously published.
  3. When the submitted article appeared as part of previously published memoirs.
  4. The above criteria apply both to print and online publication in any language.

2. It is the author’s responsibility to avoid any conflict of interest that may arise from the publication of data and results.

3. The author must properly cite and acknowledge any excerpt taken from his or her own work or that of other authors. This entails the proper use of references and citations for all sources, data, tables or graphs. Failure to do so may be considered plagiarism, in which case, the article will be rejected for publication.

4. RESU encourages authors to acknowledge and give credit to all persons who contributed to the research that informs the article.

5. The use of unpublished materials, except those by the author, requires the explicit consent of all parties involved. RESU reserves the right to request the relevant authorizations.

6. To avoid compromising RESU´s double-blind review process, the author should avoid any reference that might reveal his or her identity.

7. As long as an article is under review by RESU, the author may not submit it for consideration or publication elsewhere. Failure to comply with this stipulation will result in termination of the review or publishing processes.

8. The author accepts RESU’s rules, criteria, and editorial procedures in their entirety.

Peer-reviewers’ responsibilities

1. Reviewers determine whether or not a manuscript is worthy of publication. In the event of rejection, reviewers should provide sufficient reasons to support their decisions. In all cases, they should provide the authors with guidance on how to improve their work.

2. Reviewers should only accept manuscripts in subject areas in which they can contribute expertise, scholarship and knowledge, in fulfillment of their professional commitment.

3. Reviewers must avoid any conflict of interest that might arise from the articles they receive.