I. For authors
I.1. Open access and copyright policies
All articles published by AWARI are open access, meaning they are freely available without any kind of subscription nor restriction. The articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0) which permits copying and redistributing the material in any medium or format, adapting, transforming, and building upon the material as long as the license terms are followed. More information about this license can be found here.
I.2. Publication fees
There is no fee or charges applied for article processing and/or publication in AWARI.
I.3. Peer review
The peer-review process operates using the double-blind model. The following document typologies will undergo full peer review:
- Original article
- Review article
- Short communication
- Opinion article
The typology ‘editorials’ are written by the journal’s Board Members or Guest Editors, while the ‘errata’ or ‘retraction notices’ are written by the members of the Editorial Office. These documents are not peer-reviewed.
I.3.1. Post-submission stage
Once a paper is submitted, the journal’s Editor(s)-in-Chief, in coordination with the Associate Editor(s), checks its relevance to the journal, completeness of metadata, and content, such as technical quality and presentation. At this stage, the Editor might reject the paper if he/she considers it as not suitable for peer review.
I.3.2. Editorial assignment and review phase
When the Editor-in-Chief moves the paper to the peer review phase, a Handling Editor is assigned to coordinate the review process. The Handling Editor invites two potential reviewers of considerable expertise in the field and who are willing to collaborate. Reviewers perform voluntary work; nevertheless, they are asked to consider the timeliness, confidentiality, possible conflict of interests, and ethical behavior.
I.3.3. Editorial decision
Once the review process is completed, the Handling Editor in coordination with the Editor-in-Chief makes a final decision, which can be one of the following:
- Considered with minor revisions
- Considered with major revisions
When the papers are ‘considered with minor revisions’, ‘considered with major revisions’ or ‘rejected’, the author(s) will receive the comments resulting from the evaluation process. Those authors whose papers are accepted in their current form may receive comments regarding the journal’s guidelines in order to publish the final version. The review process is closed when, after all the required review rounds, the author(s) addresses all the comments raised by the reviewers and/or editors.
I.4. Editorial policies
AWARI ensures the publication of high-quality content derived from transparent and trusted research practices. AWARI follows all the guidelines and best publication practices defined by the Committee of Publication Ethics (COPE).
AWARI demands that all authors listed in the manuscripts have taken a real responsibility during the research process and article creation. We encourage the corresponding authors, project leaders, or institutions to avoid adding people who did not contribute to the research output (Gift authors) or to exclude people who did contribute and its name is not finally included (Ghost authors). In order to prevent so, it is strongly recommended to decide the authorship prior to the project writing.
Before considering a paper for possible publication, a decision needs to be made regarding the definition of the ‘corresponding author’ and the ‘order of authors’. The corresponding author will play an administrative role since he/she will be contacted by the Editorial Office during the manuscript evaluation, production, and post-publication processes.
A contribution statement needs to be submitted together with the manuscript where the role per author is described. The authors can find support on the roles defined by CRediT. This information will be published together with the full text. All those whose contributions are not listed in the taxonomy defined by CRediT can be listed in the Acknowledgements section.
In case someone requests to withdraw his/her name from a paper, or even claim for inclusion, a formal declaration needs to be submitted to the Editorial Office. This request will be considered once a letter of agreement is signed by all authors.
Any allegation of misconduct or questionable practice must be reported to the Editorial Office, either during the pre or post-publication stages. AWARI will follow the COPE’s Core Practices to decide on any ethical issue.
4.3. Conflict of interest
A Conflict of Interest (COI) takes place when authors have personal, academic, or financial relationships with third parties that could influence the content of research work submitted for publication. At the time to submit any type of paper, authors are requested to complete the COI Statement by which all potential interests are declared, if applicable. By means of this statement, the following issues might be declared:
- Direct or indirect resources received by any institution to complete the research work.
- Financial relationships with entities that supported the performance of the research work.
- Patents and copyrights, whether pending, issued, licensed, and/or receiving royalties related to the research work.
- Personal relationships with people who can influence the research content.
These are some examples of COI statement:
- ⦍Author name⦎ has received ⦍state the received benefits⦎ from ⦍Institution name or equivalent⦎.
- ⦍Author name⦎ has ⦍type of relationship⦎ with ⦍Institution name or equivalent⦎.
If there is no conflict of interest, the authors must declare:
- The author(s) declare that there is no conflict of interest.
4.4. Research data, reproducibility, and transparency
The authors are encouraged to share the data behind the research work. The AWARI’s policy is to make all scientific data of open access since we follow the Guidelines on Open Access to Scientific Publications and Research Data defined by the European Commission. The data sharing process can occur in the following ways:
- Depositing data in a public repository. The Registry of Research Data Repositories can be of help to select a platform to host the data. The link(s) to access the data should be included in the manuscript.
- Data as supplementary material. During the submission stage, authors can submit supplementary files containing relevant data to share. These files will be available during the peer-review process and will be also published together with the paper's main text.
- Data on request. Prior to the publication process, authors may be asked for research data at the request of the editors or reviewers.
Citations to research data should appear in the full text in the reference section. Authors need to follow the Joint Declaration of Data Citation Principles to provide the correct citation and referencing of the data.
4.5. Statement of data consent
In order to make science more transparent, open, and reproducible, AWARI encourages its authors to submit a data statement; which will be publicly available. These are some examples:
- The (Name/type of data) generated during the development of this study has been deposited in (Repository name) and it is accessible at (Data URL).
- The (Name/type of data) generated during the development of this study has been included in the manuscript.
- The (Name/type of data) generated during the development of this study has been published as supplementary material.
- The (Name/type of data) generated during the development of this study cannot be freely available due to (reasons) but they might be requested to (contact information).
- The (Name/type of data) generated during the development of this study cannot be freely available due to restrictions imposed by (Name of the restrictor).
- No data have been generated during the development of this study.
4.6. Post-publication discussions, corrections, and retractions
Retractions and corrections occur when, once a paper is published, it is detected errors, plagiarism, content falsification, data manipulation, or legal issues regarding privacy and copyright. In each case, all actions will be made with the consent of the author(s) and, from the Editorial Office, we will proceed according to the COPE’s Guidelines.
Authors can use preprint servers to host their articles before submission to the journals. This will not count as multiple or redundant publications. Some of the preprint servers that can be used are ArXiv, bioRxiv, psyArXiv, SocArXiv, engrXiv, e-LIS, RePEc, etc.
II. For reviewers
II.1. Peer reviewing for AWARI
Peer-reviewers lie at the core of the scholarly publishing process since they play a critical role in content quality control. For that reason, AWARI encourages the reviewers to submit comprehensive, constructive, objective, and transparent reports.
There are two ways to become a reviewer, either by direct invitation from a journal’s editorial board or by subscribing as a reviewer. In case you wish to be part of the pool of reviewers, it is important to provide accurate contact information including affiliation and research interests.
Accepting a review invitation implies the following:
- Agree to review only if you have the required expertise to assess the paper.
- Provide accurate personal and professional contact information to the editors.
- Accept if there are no conflicting interests with the authors. Competing interests may be of personal, financial, intellectual, professional, political, or religious nature.
- Follow the journal guidelines on peer review.
- Undertake a response to the peer review within the required time frame.
II.2. Steps to conduct a review
- Read the paper and any supplementary material, if exists. In case of missing materials or incomplete information, contact only the editor.
- Confidentiality during the peer review process is highly important. For that reason, do not use information derived from this process for your own or other’s benefits; anyone else can be involved in the review of the paper.
- If during the review process, a competing interest is discovered, the journal’s editor needs to be notified.
II.3. Writing the review report
- The review report should be written in the format required by the journal.
- Reviewers are encouraged to be objective and constructive and, if possible, provide references to support general statements. Notice that the aim of peer review is to help authors to improve the paper.
- As a reviewer, you are allowed to provide confidential comments to the editor as well as a recommendation to accept, consider with minor revisions, consider with major revisions or reject the paper. The final recommendation should be consistent with the comments of the authors. In case you have not reviewed the whole document, please inform the editor about the sections that were assessed.
- The following criteria are asked at the time to assess the paper:
- The objective, methodology, and results are consistent;
- The research questions or hypothesis are valid;
- The study is original;
- Previous research findings have been presented, discussed, and compared with the results of the study;
- The language and presentation of the figures and tables are clear;
- The references are complete and coherent with the content of the paper and the status of the field.
II.4. Publication ethics
All the AWARI’s publication practices are inspired by the COPE Guidelines. For that reason, we invite reviewers to deepen into the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.
II.5 Acknowledgment to reviewers
All those who have acted as reviewers, their names will be publicly available on the journal’s website.
III. For editors
III.1. Editors’ roles and responsibilities
The editors are in charge of:
- Make initial reviews of articles to ensure that they are within the thematic scope of the journal and that they meet the basic requirements for possible peer review;
- Manage articles if they are within their research area, if not, a member of the editorial committee can be designated to act as managing editor;
- Evaluate possible conflict of interest that affect the transparency of the editorial process;
- Invite a minimum of two reviewers per article;
- Make decisions regarding peer-reviewed articles;
- Ensure that the deadlines established within the editorial process are met;
- Suggest changes to the thematic scope of the journal;
- Assess special issues;
- Promote the journal;
- Manage the editorial team, which means they can remove inactive members and bring new members who are experts in the field.
III.2. Peer review and decision making
Peer review ensures that the published article has the highest quality standards. For this reason, it is considered the most important phase in the scholarly publication process. The stages of this process are the following:
- Initial review to ensure that the paper complies with a minimum of quality in terms of content and format.
- Invite two potential reviewers directly or assign a member of the editorial board to act as Handling Editor. If a Handling Editor is assigned, he/she will invite the reviewers and carry out the remaining editorial process.
- Invite two potential reviewers to assess the content of the article. Reviewers should be experts in the topic they are proposed to assess, they must not be affiliated with the authors’ institution, and both reviewers should not belong to the same institution.
- Make a final decision based on the reviewers’ comments. In the event that the reviewers’ reports are completely opposed, a third reviewer needs to be invited. The review process closes when the article has gone through all the necessary review rounds and the author has considered all recommendations. The decisions to make will be the following:
- Considered with minor revisions
- Considered with major revisions
III.3. Accepting special issues
Organizing special issues is a good opportunity for publishing articles on a certain emerging topic. Editors should assess all the special issue proposals from the point of view of its scope and the team of editors behind it, that is, the prospective Guest Editors.
III.4. Publication ethics
If an Editor detects any case of misconduct including authorship disputes, plagiarism, a duplicate submission, conflict of interest, or content manipulation, they should report it to the Editorial Office. The AWARI will follow the COPE’s Guidelines to proceed in every single case. For more information about our editorial policies, please visit this page.