Italian Journal of Educational Technology is a peer-reviewed scientific journal that abides by the code of publication ethics and ‘Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors’ proposed by COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) and adheres to its guidelines. Accordingly, all possible steps are taken to guard against any fraud that may occur during the publication of a paper in Italian Journal of Educational Technology. The parties involved - Authors, Editors, Guest Editors, International Editorial Advisory Board members, Journal Management Board members, Online Journal Management Board members, Editorial Office Secretary, and journal Reviewers – are expected to understand and share a commitment to the following ethical standards.

Double-blind review procedure

With the exception of the editorials, all articles undergo a double-blind peer review process. The final decision on publication is taken by the Editors or by the Guest Editors (for guest-edited special issues) on the basis of the results of a double-blind peer review process involving at least two reviewers per paper. 

To submit an article, authors are requested to anonymize the submission, register in the journal submission system (unless already registered) and submit the article by following the instruction for authors. To anonymize the submission, self-identifying citations and references should be replaced by placeholders like “Removed for peer review”. Authors are responsible for reinserting self-identifying citations and references when manuscripts are prepared for the final submission.

The editors are committed to communicate to authors the results of the review process within four months from the article’s submission.

Correction and retractions

In accordance with guidelines from the Committee on Publication Ethics (where applicable), the Press handles different kinds of error. All articles have their proofs checked prior to publication by the author/editor, which should ensure that content errors are not present. Please contact the journal if you believe an article needs correcting.

Post-publication changes to the publication are not permitted unless in exceptional circumstances. If an error is discovered in a published article then the publisher will assess whether a Correction paper or Retraction is required. Visit our Correction Policy page for more information.

Misconduct and Complaints

Allegations of misconduct will be taken with utmost seriousness, regardless of whether those involved are internal or external to the journal, or whether the submission in question is pre- or post-publication. If an allegation of misconduct is made to the journal, it must be immediately passed on to the publisher, who will follow guidelines from the COPE on how to address the nature of the problem. Should the matter involve allegations against a member of the journal or publishing team, an independent and objective individual(s) may be sought to lead the investigation. Where misconduct is proven or strongly suspected, the journal has an obligation to report the issue to the author's institution, who may conduct their own investigation. This applies to both research misconduct (e.g. completing research without ethical approval and consent, fabricating or falsifying data etc.) and publication misconduct (e.g. manipulating the peer review process, plagiarism etc.). Should an investigation conclude that misconduct or misinformation has occurred then the author, along with their institution, will be notified. Should the publication record need to be corrected, the journal's correction policy will be followed.

Should an author wish to lodge a complaint against an editorial decision, or the editorial process in general, they should first approach the Editor-in-Chief of the journal, explaining their complaint and ask for a reasoned response. Should this not be adequate, the author should raise the matter with the publisher, who will investigate the nature of the complaint and act as arbiter on whether the complaint should be upheld and investigated further. This will follow guidelines set out by COPE.

Obligations of Editorial Staff

Publication decisions

• The Editors/Guest Editors have responsibility to accept or reject a submitted manuscript. In order to reach this decision, they may seek support from the International Editorial Advisory Board members, the Journal Management Board members and request evaluation from qualified Reviewers.

Fair play

• The Editors, the International Editorial Advisory Board members, the Journal Management Board members, the Online Journal Management Board members and the Editorial Office Secretary (henceforth the Editorial Staff) are committed to ensuring that all submitted manuscripts receive an unbiased and impartial evaluation in order to guarantee the authors an accurate, impartial and comprehensive scientific judgment. Hence, manuscripts will be evaluated for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
• As the journal covers a range of disciplinary and interdisciplinary areas within the broad field of Educational Technology, the Editors will seek to ensure that each submitted manuscript is assigned to Reviewers who possess relevant expertise in the specific area/s addressed in the manuscript.

Confidentiality

• The Editorial Staff will not disclose information about any manuscript under consideration for publication to anyone other than Reviewers. In any case, the authors' identity and institution affiliation/s will not be disclosed to Reviewers.

Disclosure and Conflict of interest

• Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.

Further duties of the Editorial staff

• The Editorial Staff will:
  - adhere consistently to, maintain and promote the ethical code of the journal;
  - monitor and take action to enforce ethical policies in a fair and consistent way;
  - exercise the highest standards of integrity, recognizing cases where there might be conflicting interests and planning appropriate interventions;
  - work proactively with authors, reviewers and members of the Journal Boards to ensure that all parties are appropriately informed of the journal’s ethical code, editorial policies, and achieve impartial and timely management of the journal.
• Where any errors are identified in a paper published in the latest edition of the Journal, the Editors will ensure publication of a suitable erratum.
• The Editorial Staff guarantees that the Reviewers' evaluation process is devoted to checking the comprehensiveness, accuracy and clarity of submitted manuscripts.
• The Editorial Staff seeks to ensure that papers published adhere fully to the same COPE ethical standards that the journal observes.
• The Editorial Staff is committed to informing readers about actions undertaken to ensure unbiased evaluation.
• The Editorial Staff publishes comprehensive Instructions for Authors, which are regularly updated as appropriate.
• The Editorial Staff publishes the names of members of the International Editorial Advisory Board, of the Journal Management Board and the annual list of Reviewers.
• The Editors are committed to recruiting new members to the Journal Editorial Advisory Board, specifically highly qualified scholars who have actively contributed to the journal's enhancement and scientific development.

• The Editors (including Guest Editors), the Editorial Advisory Board members, the Online Journal Management Board members and the Editorial Office Secretary (henceforth the Editorial Staff) are committed to ensuring that all submitted manuscripts receive an unbiased and impartial evaluation in order to guarantee the authors an accurate, impartial and comprehensive scientific judgment.
• The Editors have responsibility to accept or reject a submitted manuscript. In order to reach this decision, the Editors may seek support from the Editorial Advisory Board members and request evaluation from qualified Referees.
• As the Italian Journal of Educational Technology covers a range of disciplinary and interdisciplinary areas within the broad field of Technology Enhanced Learning and Teaching, the Editors will seek to ensure that each submitted manuscript is assigned to Referees who possess relevant expertise in the specific area/s addressed in the manuscript.
• The Editorial Staff will not disclose information about any manuscript under consideration for publication to anyone other than Referees. In any case, the authors' identity and institution affiliation/s will not be disclosed to Referees.
• The Editors and the Editorial Advisory Board will:
  - adhere consistently to, maintain and promote the ethical code of the journal;
  - monitor and take action to enforce ethical policies in a fair and consistent way;
  - exercise the highest standards of integrity, recognizing cases where there might be conflicting interests and planning appropriate interventions;
  - work proactively with authors, referees and members of the Editorial Advisory Board to ensure that all parties are appropriately informed of the journal’s ethical code, editorial policies, and achieve impartial and timely management of the journal.
• Where any errors are identified in a paper published in the latest edition of the Journal, the Editors will ensure publication of a suitable erratum.
• The Editors commit to clearly identify any papers that have been invited for publication; such papers are not submitted for Referees' evaluation.
• The Editorial Staff guarantees that the Referees' evaluation process is devoted to checking the comprehensiveness, accuracy and clarity of submitted manuscripts.
• The Editorial Staff seeks to ensure that papers published in the Italian Journal of Educational Technology adhere fully to the same COPE ethical standards that the journal observes.
• The Editorial Staff is committed to informing readers about actions undertaken to ensure unbiased evaluation.
• The Editorial Staff publishes comprehensive Instructions for Authors, which are regularly updated as appropriate.
• The Editorial Staff publishes the names of members of the Editorial Advisory Board and the annual list of Referees.
• The Editors are committed to recruiting new members to the Editorial Advisory Board, specifically highly qualified scholars who have actively contributed to the journal's enhancement and scientific development.

Obligations of Authors

Reporting standards

• Authors are expected to submit an accurately written manuscript that follows the Instructions for Authors and the Authors’ Guidelines. They are to ensure that the content is relevant in regard to the scope of the Journal as described in the Editorial Guidelines and/or the specific Call for Papers.
• Papers should report original research presenting an accurate and detailed account of the research performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

Data Access and Retention

• If applicable, authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, and should, in any event, be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and plagiarism

• The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works and, if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

• An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of Sources

• Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of the Paper

• Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
• The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
• All authors must confirm that they fit the definition of an author (see above) during submission.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

• All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental errors in published works

• When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Response to reviewers’ remarks

• Authors are expected to respond suitably to any Reviewers' remarks received, particularly by incorporating any requested modifications or following suggestions for optimisation. If Authors fail to do so, or do not provide reasonable justification for not doing so, the manuscript may not be accepted for publication.

Breaches to code of ethics

• Any Author who believes that the present Code of Ethics has been breached may send a complaint to the Editors.

Funding

• To ensure transparency, authors are required to specify funding sources and detail requirements for ethical research in the submitted manuscript (see section “Fundings” in the template).

Obligations of Reviewers

Contribution to editorial decision

• During the peer-review process, the appointed Reviewers are expected to suggest any improvements they feel can or should be made to the submitted manuscript. Additionally, they will support decision making about the submitted manuscripts, mediated by the Editor/s.

Promptness

• The Reviewer will promptly inform the Editorial staff in the case that the review cannot be completed by the agreed deadline.
• Any Reviewer who feels inadequate to judge a manuscript, as the content does not deal with his/her specialist subject, should inform the Editorial staff.

Standards of objectivity

• Reviews should be conducted objectively. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. The Reviewer will guarantee freedom of expression, providing an unbiased judgment of the manuscript's content and quality, and be respectful of the Authors' scientific [intellectual] independence. Personal and/or ideological criticism will not be tolerated.

Acknowledgement of Sources

• Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and conflict of interest

• The Reviewer will avoid any situation of actual or perceived conflict of interest and, where such a conflict should arise, refrain from evaluating the manuscript. Such conflicts may include, but are not limited to, evaluation of manuscripts written by their own students, by colleagues with whom the Reviewer has recently collaborated/co-authored other papers, and by those belonging to the same research group.
• The Reviewer is to treat the manuscript as a confidential document: content is not to be disclosed to any degree to third parties and the Reviewer will refrain from referring to or otherwise using the content for his/her own purposes.
• The identity of the Reviewer will not be disclosed to authors unless the Reviewer makes an explicit and justifiable request to do so.