Ethical code declaration

In drawing up this declaration of code of ethics and good practice, the Revista de Historia de la Lengua Española is based on the Guide to Good Practice for Publication, drawn up by the Spanish National Research Council (CSIC), and on the principles expressed in international standards and codes of ethics, as reflected in COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics).
This declaration affects all parties involved: publishers, editors, authors and reviewers.

1. Publishers (Editors-in-chief and deputy editors-in-chief)

It is their responsibility, in collaboration with the Editorial Board, to ensure scientific quality and to prevent malpractice in the content published in RHLE. It is also responsible for the management of the journal and for editing the papers received with confidentiality, transparency and in a reasonable time.
The editors commit themselves to the following
- clearly establish the relationship between publishers, editors and other parties;
- promote editorial independence;
- respect privacy;
- protect intellectual property;
- maintain the integrity of published content;
- publish content in a timely manner.

2. Editors and Editorial Boards
Their responsibility is circumscribed by the following principles.

• Objectivity and impartiality: The Editorial Board and the Editors-in.chief team shall treat all papers with objectivity and impartiality, ensuring that there is no discrimination of any kind and with full respect for the intellectual independence of the authors. Their decisions will be based exclusively on objective scientific and academic criteria. It also recognises the right of reply of those authors who are evaluated. These will be dealt with diligently, objectively and respectfully.
• Confidentiality: The Editorial Board and the Editors-in.chief team will treat the works received and their content with strict confidentiality throughout the editing process until publication. They will ensure the privacy of the evaluations made by the reviewers and the secrecy of any rejected papers and their content. They will also ensure that no one in the journal, nor any of the people involved in the evaluation and editing process or any third party, can make any use of the ideas or content obtained from unpublished papers, except with the explicit and express consent of the author(s).
• Review of papers: All original unpublished articles submitted for publication in the journal will undergo double-blind peer review. The Editorial Board and the Editors-in.chief team will take care to guarantee the anonymity of the authors and reviewers in each paper submitted for review, as well as the objectivity and appropriateness of the reviews in accordance with the peer review standards established and approved by the Editorial Board. It will also ensure that there is no conflict of interest in the reviewers who are to evaluate the work. Sections of the journal that are not subject to peer review will always be duly identified.
• Irregularities and disavowals. The Editorial Board and the Editors-in.chief team will ensure the integrity of the published scientific output. For this reason, they reserve the right to refuse publication, disavow or withdraw all articles in which irregularities and scientific malpractice are observed or discovered, such as:
  1. any type of voluntary or involuntary plagiarism,
  2. fraud,
  3. manipulation of data,
  4. misrepresentation of sources or bibliography,
  5. misrepresentation in the data provided in the submission requirements, 6. misrepresentation or inaccuracy in the data,
  6. falsity or inaccuracy in the declaration of authorship,
  7. false or inaccurate metadata,
  8. falsehood, inaccuracy, manipulation or intentional omission of all or part of sources or bibliography,
  9. duplicate articles or articles previously published in other journals or books,
  10. unauthorised use of third party content, etc.
  
  
• Except for possible cases of plagiarism, published works in which an error of this type is detected may be subsequently corrected, subject to the agreement of the Editorial Board, with express reference to the irregularity corrected.
  The Editorial Board of the journal reserves the right to publish the news of the disavowal of a particular text, mentioning the reasons for it, in order to distinguish malpractice from unintentional error. The decision to disavow a text will be taken as soon as possible in order to avoid its dissemination.
• Plagiarism and duplication: These are considered as serious misconduct and scientific fraud. The Board of Editors and the Editorial Board will ensure that the peer review process monitors the originality of papers and detects plagiarism and redundant publications, as well as falsified or manipulated data. They also reserve the right to use the means and software available or to make use of appropriate institutions and bodies to enable them to check for plagiarism or duplication of articles.
• Editorial Team Rules: The Editors-in-chief team shall be responsible for the correct application of the rules governing the functioning of the Editorial Team and shall ensure that its members are aware of them.
• Submission guidelines: The rules for submission and editing of papers will be public and immediately accessible.
• Conflict of interest: It is the responsibility of the Editorial Board and the Editors-in.chief team to avoid conflicts of interest. If any of their members has a professional relationship with the author or is directly or indirectly related to the research submitted for publication, they must stay out of and refrain from intervening in the evaluation process of the work proposed for publication in the journal.

3. Authors

Authors submitting papers for publication in the journal must ensure that the following ethical principles are observed:

• Authorship of the text. Papers submitted must be signed by the author and by any other person who has played a significant role in the planning, organisation, conduct or processing of the research on which the paper is based. In the case of multiple authorship, the author who submits the paper to the journal will ensure that the other authors, as well as the persons who have contributed to it, are acknowledged. In the case of co-authored papers, the author responsible for submitting them to the journal will ensure that all co-authors have approved and reviewed the final version before publication, to which they must expressly give their acceptance. All persons claiming authorship share equal responsibility for the work submitted. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution or writing of the submitted work. It is considered bad scientific practice to include as co-authors persons with fictitious or gifted authorship.
• Originality. Papers submitted for evaluation and publication in the journal must be original and unpublished. They must include the bibliography cited and the data obtained and used with faithful and exact reference to the sources when necessary. The discussion of the results will be objective.
• Correct attitude. Discrepancies in the research that may exist with other researchers will always be respectful, objective, and exclusively limited to the subject.
• Verification. Sufficient and necessary information will be provided so that any reader can verify what is affirmed and can confirm or refute the interpretations argued in the work.
• Citations. Authors will take special care to cite appropriately, and according to the journal's rules, the provenance of all ideas and literal phrases taken from other authors or published works. This also applies to graphic material published from other sources, providing, if necessary, the pertinent reproduction permissions.
• Responsibility. Authors are responsible for ensuring that the text and the data and results presented in their work are original and have not been copied, manipulated, invented or distorted.
• Exclusivity. Authors will confirm that the papers submitted to the journal are not under evaluation at the same time in another journal (unless they have been rejected or voluntarily withdrawn from it). Submitting the same original to more than one journal at the same time is considered unacceptable behaviour.
• Duplications. Duplications are only permitted in the case of an extension or modification of an already published work, provided that this is expressly stated, properly cited and the aspects in which they differ are pointed out. This also applies to translations of works published in other languages or transformed from popular texts for the general public to be aimed at a specialist audience.
• Sources of funding. The author must indicate all sources of funding for the study. This information must be included in the published version.
• Bibliography. The author undertakes to cite, following the rules of the journal, all the bibliography used for his or her research. It is considered unacceptable and serious scientific malpractice to intentionally and deliberately omit bibliographical sources used or on which the contents of the paper are directly or indirectly based.
• Other sources. Verbal communications or scientific advice should be acknowledged and with the express consent of the sources.
• Corrections to the work. The author undertakes to inform the journal as soon as possible of any errors in his or her work. He/she may consequently modify, rectify, retract or completely withdraw the publication. In the case of well-founded suspicion, the Board of Editors may always ask the author to retract or correct the paper immediately or to provide evidence of the accuracy of the original paper.
• Conflict of interest. Authors undertake to notify the journal and their work of any conflict of interest: for example, any commercial, financial or personal ties that directly affect the results of their research. Authors shall provide, if requested, the original data related to a paper under review and, in any case, shall keep such data for a reasonable time after publication.
• Authors will be provided with anonymised evaluations of their work and will be informed of the acceptance, any proposed modifications or final rejection of their work. Authors will have the right to submit objections to the findings of the evaluations.

4. Reviewers

The Revista de Historia de la Lengua Española submits all papers received for publication to a double-blind peer review system. The sections of the journal that do not undergo peer review are expressly indicated (https://rhle.es/index.php/revista/secciones).

The peer reviewers play a fundamental role in guaranteeing the scientific quality of the articles published in the journal. They assist the journal's Editorial Board in the publication of its contents and contribute to the improvement of the published work.

• Profile of reviewers: Reviewers will be researchers who are specialists in their respective areas of research. They will receive an email inviting them to indicate whether they wish to carry out the evaluation and, if so, a second email with the deadlines and instructions.
• Number of reviewers. At least two reviewers proposed by the Editorial Board and/or the Scientific Advisory Board will participate in the external review by the double-blind peer review system.
• Compliance with deadlines. Once an article has been accepted for review, reviewers must respect the established deadlines. If they are unable to do so, they must inform the editors sufficiently in advance.
• Anonymity. The Editorial Board will take special care to maintain the anonymity of both the author and the reviewers. It will also ensure that reviewers and authors do not belong to the same institution and will ensure the confidentiality of the work submitted for review and of the reports prepared by the reviewers.
• Confidentiality. The reviewers must consider the work to be evaluated as a confidential document and undertake not to disseminate it either directly or indirectly. Under no circumstances may they use, for themselves or for the interest of third parties, the contents, ideas, arguments and conclusions of the reviewed text as long as it is not published.
• Objectivity. Reviewers shall ensure that their evaluations are fair, respectful, relevant, objective and impartial. Reviewers must adequately express their opinions on manuscripts and justify their conclusions.
• Bibliographical references. Reviewers must provide accurate bibliographic data on important works in the subject area of the article that the author may have omitted. Reviewers must also inform the editors of any similarities detected between the text under review and other works, duplication of articles, or any violation of the journal's code of ethics.
• Conflicts of interest and disclosure. If the conduct of a review involves a conflict of interest for the reviewers because they have collaborated or competed with the authors or the authors' institutions, these reviewers must decline the review proposal.
• Publication. The RHLE will publish the list of reviewers who have collaborated in previous issues, with the prior express authorisation of the reviewers.
• Each article published in the RHLE will include an express mention of the dates on which it was received and approved.
• The Editorial Board will be responsible, in the light of the reviewers' reports, for deciding whether to publish, reject the article or send it to a third reviewer. The Editorial Board will resort to a third or fourth reviewer in the following cases:
  • When one of the evaluations is positive and the other negative.
  • When the Editorial Board deems it appropriate.

5. Disclaimer

The editorial team is not responsible for the views and opinions expressed by the authors or for the content of the articles published in the journal.