Extension: It is suggested that the manuscripts not exceed 15,000 words. Within the section Conjectures and refutations, the latter should not exceed 5,000 words.
Review: Once received, all manuscripts will be subject to a first formal revision by the editorial board and, if approved, to a second double-blind peer-review process.
Languages: Manuscripts in Spanish, English, Italian, and Portuguese will be accepted.
Articles published in Quaestio facti are evaluated as follows:
1. All texts received are subject to formal review by the journal's editorial board. In this phase of general review, proposals are discarded when they are not in line with the objectives of the journal and/or the scientific quality is not of the desired standard.
Authors of articles rejected for non-compliance with the formal requirements set out in the “Guidelines for Authors” section are given a period of 10 days to correct deficiencies.
Articles accepted in this first instance are submitted for evaluation following the blind peer review process.
2. The blind peer review consists of the review and evaluation of the article by experts in the field, chosen by the editorial board, according to their skills and knowledge.
The authors of articles are unknown to reviewers, just as authors do not know who reviews their articles.
The articles in the "General" section are subject to double blind peer review, that is to say they are evaluated by two different experts. The articles in the “Conjectures and refutations”, “Science for legal proceedings” and “Iuris prudentia” sections follow the same review process conducted by a single expert.
Reviewers should issue a report to the journal board detailing whether the article meets the criteria defined by the journal. That is, the title reflects the content of the text, the structure of the text is coherent, the wording is correct and clear, the bibliography is up-to-date and properly referenced and the article contains significant contributions to the thematic area of the journal. The report should state its opinion on the publication of the article as favourable or unfavourable.
Reviewers are committed to conducting a critical, honest, and constructive review of the scientific quality of the text within the scope of their knowledge and skills. Therefore, they will only review a work if they are competent in the subject to be reviewed and if there are no conflicts of interest.
Should the reports of an article conclude with opposing opinions, the opinion of a third reviewer would be sought.
The report will determine if the article reviewed:
Is accepted with the condition of incorporating the proposed modifications. The time allowed to make changes will depend on each item and the suggested changes
Is not accepted
Quaestio facti will inform authors on the acceptance or rejection of their work within a maximum period of five months.
The magazine and the editors will produce a layout and edition of the accepted articles respecting the style and ideas of each author.
Once reviewed, accepted and the layout finalized, the article will be published immediately on the journal's website. The final publication of the article will coincide with the publication of the full issue in January or June of the corresponding year, depending on the section of which it is part.
Guarantee of blind peer review
To ensure that the evaluation of the articles follows the premises of blind review, the authors are asked to send a copy of the article without any personal or identifying data.
Similarly, during the formal review phase, the editorial board verifies that the blind copy of the article meets the required conditions.
The submission of articles for publication in Quaestio facti: International Journal on Evidential Reasoning implies acceptance of the following terms:
(a) The author agrees to respect the ethical guidelines of the journal.
(b) Quaestio facti is granted the right of first publication and the license to publish the submitted text in all and printed and electronic formats of the journal.
(c) The author retains copyright and assigns Marcial Pons exclusive publishing rights and non-exclusive exploitation rights (reproduction, distribution, public communication, and transformation) to exploit and commercialize the work, in full or in part, in all present or future formats and modes of exploitation, in all languages, for the entire lifetime of the work and throughout the world.
(d) Content published in Quaestio facti is subject to a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC BY), the full text of which is available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0. Therefore, copying, distribution, public communication, commercial use and derivative works of the contents of the journal are permitted provided that the source of the publication (Quaestio facti), the author of the article, the publisher (Marcial Pons) and the institution that publishes it (Chair of Legal Culture, University of Girona) is cited. It is the responsibility of the authors to obtain the necessary permissions for the images that may be subject to Copyright.
(e) For the purposes of any reprint, abbreviation or translation of an article from any of its sections, Quaestio facti undertakes to request authorization without delay from each author of the work in question, so that he or she may decide whether to authorize such publication.
(f) The authors who decide to republish their work in another journal or book must use the preprint version of the article, maintaining the rights of Marcial Pons referred to in section c), and should mention the previous appearance of the contribution in Quaestio facti.(g) In accordance with section e), authors are allowed to deposit their work in general and/or thematic repositories, web pages, etc., for the preprint version (version sent for review), postprint version (once reviewed and accepted for publication) and the final published article. This self-archiving policy contributes to the dissemination and visibility of articles published in the journal and of Quaestio facti.
Quaestio facti: International Journal on Evidential Reasoning adheres to the guidelines set by EASE (European Association of Science Editors) for the management, editing, review and publication of scientific results in journals from different fields of knowledge and to the principles of transparency and good practice in academic publications of COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics).
The following commitments and procedures are defined in accordance with those guidelines.
Given the suspicion and/or knowledge that bad practice or unethical behaviour have been perpetuated in either published works or those that are in the process of being revised or edited, publishers will undertake appropriate measures to identify such irregularities and/or resolve them. To do this, the editors:
If bad practices are detected during the editing process and the author corrects them, the process will continue. If the author does not accept the proposals or the explanations are considered insufficient, the article will be rejected.
If these unethical behaviours are discovered after the publication of the article, an editorial note will be published, the article will be withdrawn and/or legal action will be taken, depending on the severity.
The Directors, members of the Editorial Board and members of the Advisory Board urge the submission of complaints and appeals regarding possible misconduct in articles published in Quaestio facti, as well as of the journal itself, and undertake to respond to them.
Any such communication may be sent to the e-mail of the journal (firstname.lastname@example.org) or through the “Contact” section of the website.
As a specific anti-plagiarism measure, Quaestio facti will use plagiarism detection programs for those articles it deems necessary.
Plagiarism is considered serious unethical behaviour and, as such, all articles suspected of plagiarism will be rejected or removed if they have been published.