Codice Etico

“Diritto dello sport” is an open access peer review (single-blind) scientific journal, which hosts national and international articles in the following languages: Italian, English, French and Spanish; the publication of the articles is free of APC (Article Processing Charges). The review is published every six months.

Following the art. 10 of the Regulations for the Classification of Journals in Non-Bibliometric Areas (approved by ANVUR with Resolution of the board of Directors no. 42 of 20 February 2019), the journal Diritto dello sport complies with the current guidelines outlined by the "Committee on Publication Ethics" (COPE).

All the committee of the journal (Editor in chief, Editorial board, Editorial Secretariat, Scientific board), the Guest editors, the Referees, the Authors, and the Publisher respect the following ethical principles.

Ethical rules on the evaluation and publication of articles.

1. The Journal undertakes to publish the articles submitted to at least one anonymous review (single blind peer review) made by a subject expert (referee) not belonging to the Editorial board, and possibly not belonging to the Scientific board. The Editorial board maintain the right of a preliminary selection to select the contributions which have to be referred in accordance with art. 9, paragraph 1, Reg. ANVUR.
2. The Editorial board undertakes to comply with the regulations on copyright, plagiarism and defamation.
3. The Editorial board checks on the originality of the articles received and if a situation of plagiarism is detected, the author of the article will receive a warning. If after the warning the author will submit another not original writing, the Editorial board may decide to exclude him from future publications, without further reasons or verification of the material transmitted. For this scope, the Journal keeps a list of authors who have submitted contributions not distinguished by originality.
4. The criteria for the evaluation of the articles will be based exclusively on the scientific value and their contents, without discrimination of sex, race, gender, religion, ethnic origin, citizenship, sexual orientation, gender identity, age and political orientation of the authors. If discrimination is found in the evaluation forms received from the referees, the Editorial board will proceed to exclude the referee from the list of referees.

Confidentiality and Correctness

5. In the phases before and after the evaluation, the bodies of the Journal (Editor in chief, Editorial board and Editorial Secretariat) undertake not to disclose to third parties information relating to the content of the articles, the timing of the evaluation process, and not to use the contents of the unpublished articles for their own research, without the express written consent of the authors. Without prejudice to the anonymity of the author and the referee, information not strictly related to the evaluation of the contribution may be provided to the referees and the publisher, or the printer only after receiving the consent of the author.
6. The Journal adopts the peer review process to ensure that submitted articles remain strictly confidential during the evaluation process. In order to receive a qualified evaluation of the article that advises or not the publication of the contribution, the Editor in chief, assisted by the Editorial board, identifies the referee on the basis of competence and trust, basing his decision on the principle of autonomy and absence of conflicts of interest.

Duties of the Authors of the contributions being published.

7. All Authors are aware that their works are released in open access mode on the online platform diid.it, under the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial Share Alike (CC BY-NC-SA).
8. Compliance with Guidelines. The authors guarantees that the articles submitted for evaluation are unpublished, scientifically original and not submitted at the same time to other journals, volumes or periodicals, unless expressly consented to the Editorial board. The article can be published in other periodicals or volumes, subject with previous consent of the Editorial board. In this case, a reference to the previous publication in Diritto dello Sport must be expressly inserted.

The Author undertakes to comply with the Guidelines and Editorial Rules indicated for publication in the Journal.

9. Authorship. The authorship of the contribution must be clear and in the case of articles with more than one author, the part written by each author must be clearly highlighted. The authorship of the work must be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, writing and interpretation of research content. The main Author (who interacts with the Editors) must guarantee that all Co-authors are properly included and have supervised and approved the final version of the work and they agree to the publication. Any additional contributors to the research presented in the article may be mentioned by the Authors in a final note of the article, along with a note of thanks. Author names will be listed in the article in the same order that authors are listed in the submission.
10. Originality and plagiarism. Authors shall guarantee original scientific contributions, ensuring that the submitted article has never been published elsewhere or by others. The proposed manuscripts must not have been published as copyrighted material in other journals or volume.
11. Conflict of interest. The authors must not be in a position of conflict of interest that can potentially influences the results of their research, the theses supported, or the interpretations proposed. The support of any funding or subjects, and the project from which the research derives must be clearly highlighted within the article.
12. Errors in the published articles. If after the online publication the author detects inaccuracies, errors or typos in his contribution, he must promptly inform the Journal, and collaborate actively with the committees of the Journal in order to ensure the good and immediate success of the correction procedure. In this case, the Journal reserves the right to suspend online access to the contribution until the changes are completed.
13. In case of disputes. Anyone who finds violations of the above rules can raise the issue with the Editors of the Journal. The Editors, with the contribution of the Scientific Board, will respond to the request within 45 days. Where necessary, the Editors and the Scientific Board may avail themselves of the opinion of specially qualified external individuals. The decisions of the Editors and the Scientific Board will always be motivated. Any retraction of a publication will be accompanied by a complete and public motivation of the action taken.

Reviewing process

14. The acceptance of the articles for publication is subject to the scrutiny of the Editor in chief and the Editorial board, with the help of one or more Guest editors if necessary, who may suggest to the Author improvements to the article before to send it to a Referee for the review.
15. The Editor in chief, with the support of the Editorial board, and with the help of the Scientific board and or one or more Guest editors if necessary, identifies the Referee according to the criteria indicated above in art. 6 and sends him the article (with the help of the Editorial secretariat), assigning him/her a deadline for the execution of the review. The Editorial board can decide to identify more than one Referee. In order to guarantee the secret during the review process, the Author does not have the possibility to suggest a Referee.
16. The Editor in chief, with the help of the Editorial Secretariat, may ask the author for the corrections and additions that the referee has reported necessary during the anonymous revision procedure. The Editorial board may bring to the attention of the author the evaluation, anonymously, expressed by the referee. The author may express objections regarding the evaluation of the referee, on which he will decide on the Management and Editorial Committee.
17. The referee, in addition to the detailed observations on the analysed contribution, will indicate a final judgment on the article which may consist in: a) publishable without corrections, b) publishable with corrections, c) publishable with substantial corrections, d) not publishable. If the result is "publishable with corrections" it will be the responsibility of the Editorial board to verify whether the author has made the corrections indicated by the referee; if the result is "publishable with substantial corrections", the contribution corrected and/or integrated by the author will be sent to the referee for a new evaluation.
18. To ensure the homogeneity of the publications on the Journal, the Editorial board reserves the right to proceed with purely editorial changes to the articles after the first correction of the draft.
19. The Editorial board have the right to publish the articles with the scheduling that it deems most appropriate for the scientific and editorial composition of the issues.

 

Ethical duties of Referees

20. Referees’ work is voluntary and free.
21. Compliance with time schedule. The referee undertakes to send a response within 45 days of sending the articles. The referee who does not feel properly qualified for the revision of the articles, or who has a temporary impediment to carrying out the evaluation must immediately notify the Editorial board.
22. Conflict of interest and disclosure. Referees are required not to accept articles if a conflict of interest emerges due to previous specific relationships of collaboration or competition with the authors (who are unknown, but in any case, can be identified by deduction) or if a connection emerges with the bodies or the institutions related to the articles. Stringency of the peer-review.
23. The evaluation of contributions must be based on criteria of objectivity and correctness, excluding any personal and ideological evaluation. The comments of the referee must be strictly technical and analytically reported on the evaluation form sent by the Editorial Secretariat at the time of the request for referencing. Each given statement, observation or argument must preferably be accompanied by a corresponding quotation and documentation, or adequately illustrated.
24. In case of a negative outcome of the evaluation, the referee is invited to indicate the essential bibliographic details neglected by the Author. Where the referee finds any similarities or overlaps of the contribution received with other works known to him, he is required to report them immediately to the Editorial board.
25. Confidentiality. The referees may not in any way disseminate the articles received or discuss on them with people not authorized by the Editorial board. The content of the papers and the confidential information obtained during the review procedure must not be used by the referees for their own scientific or personal benefit.

For further information, reports of behaviours contrary to the Code of Ethics, issues concerning the authorship of the works and any other report. please write to redazione@dirittodellosport.eu.