The journal Revue Hybrides follow the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and requieres its collaborators to respect the Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers drawn up by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The following statements are inspired by these guidelines.

1. Duties of the journal

1.1. Review process

All efforts are made to treat effectively and fast the submitted manuscripts.

Every submission is analysed by a plagiarism detection software. If it reveals similarities that do not respect the quotation rules, the submission is rejected.

A submission outside the scope of the journal or going against its editorial policy can be rejected by the editorial board without resorting to the peer review process.

Excepting for those cases and for the book reviews, every submission is made anonymous and reviewed by two external referees who are expert in the field.

After the editorial board and the direction have made their decision on the basis of the reviewers’ reports, a manuscript can be accepted, accepted with minor or major changes required or rejected.

• If the manuscript has been accepted with changes required, the editorial board and the direction make a definitive decision depending on how the reviewers’ suggestions or comments were taken into account by the author;
• If the manuscript has been rejected, a written reasoned opinion is sent to the authors. However, the authors can ask for a second evaluation. In this case the editorial board and/or the direction examine the situation and the manuscript can be subjected to a final peer review.

1.2. Conflicts of interest

If he/she has a conflict of interest with an author, the concerned member of the editorial board recuses himself.

1.3. Objectivity

Every proposal for an article is objectively taken into consideration and its merit are judged without distinction of sex, religion, sexual orientation, nationality, ethnical origin, length of service or institutional affiliation of its authors.

1.4. Confidentiality and data use

The peer review process is strictly confidential. Information or correspondence on a manuscript are not shared with no one outside this process. No new information, argument or interpretation contained in a proposal is used by editors or editorial board members before publication without the authors’ explicit consent.

1.5. Editing

Every accepted text (on the first attempt or after changes) is subjected to editorial work in close cooperation with the authors.

1.6. Fundamental errors in published works

If the editors or publisher learns that a published work contains a significant error or inaccuracy, then they inform the authors. It is the authors’ obligation to promptly correct or retract the paper or provide evidence to the journal editors of the correctness of the paper.

2. Duties of reviewers

2.1. Recusal

Any invited referee who has conflicts of interest with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the manuscript and the work described therein, who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.

2.2. Confidentiality and data use

The peer review process is strictly confidential. Information or correspondence on a manuscript are not shared with no one outside this process. No new information, argument or interpretation contained in a proposal is used by referees before publication without the authors’ explicit consent.

2.3. Objectivity

A proposal for an article is objectively taken into consideration and its merit are judged without distinction of sex, religion, sexual orientation, nationality, ethnical origin, length of service or institutional affiliation of its authors. The referees respect intellectual independence of the authors and clearly express their views on the basis of arguments; ad hominem attacks are prohibited.

2.4. Multiple or redundant publications

If an invited referee is aware of a published work or another submission which contains substantial similarities with the proposal under evaluation, he/she informs the journal direction.

2.5. References

Referees inform the journal direction if others authors’ works are used without a reference to their source.

3. Duties of authors

3.1. Originality and plagiarism

Authors ensure that they have written and submit only entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited. They also ensure that their proposal is without prejudice to the rights of legal entities or natural persons.

3.2. Conflicts of interest

Authors disclose any (financial, professional…) conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. Moreover, all sources of financial support for the work are disclosed.

3.3. Authorship

The corresponding author ensures that all appropriate co-authors – who made significant contributions to the conception or interpretation of the study – and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the author list and verify that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication. All persons who made substantial contributions to the work but who do not meet the criteria for authorship can be acknowledged in the “Acknowledgements” section.

3.4. Defamatory comments

Authors ensure that their proposal does not contain any knowingly misrepresentations or defamatory or fraudulent statements.

3.5. Multiple or redundant publications

Authors ensure that their proposal has not been published and that it is not based on published works (except for the book reviews and the papers of the Exchanges section which are based on the reviewed works or on the opening paper). They do not submit simultaneously their paper to various journals.

3.6. References

Authors ensure that they appropriately mention and quote all the works they used for their own one.

3.7. Editing

Authors authorise the editorial team to make adjustments to their paper and cooperate when these adjustments are submitted to them for approval.

3.8. Fundamental errors in published works

When authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, it is their obligation to promptly notify the journal’s editors and cooperate with them to either correct the paper in the form of an erratum or to retract the paper. If the editors or publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error or inaccuracy, then it is the authors’ obligation to promptly correct or retract the paper or provide evidence to the journal editors of the correctness of the paper.

3.9. Print and digital publication

Authors allow the journal to distribute their paper in printed and digital form.