Ethics statement
This Ethical Code was approved by the Publications Commission of the Instituto Nacional de Administración Pública in January 2023 and revised in July 2024. It is publicly available on the journals' website (https://revistasonline.inap.es/index.php/index/codigo_etico).
PUBLICATION ETHICS
All parties involved in the publication of scholarly journal articles—authors, editors, and reviewers—are expected to adhere to established standards of ethical behavior.
This statement is based on the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors issued by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). COPE provides resources for editors, reviewers, and authors on professional publishing standards (see publicationethics.org). In addition to COPE, other organizations contribute to defining best practices in scholarly publishing, such as the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA), and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME).
The Instituto Nacional de Administración Pública is committed to maintaining high standards of academic peer review and professional editorial judgment. Journals published by the Institute operate under the editorial direction of independent editors, who are solely responsible for all decisions regarding the content of each issue and ensure the accuracy, integrity, and originality of the published articles. The Institute supports editors in managing their journals ethically and transparently while upholding the editorial principles established in their respective academic disciplines.
Additional information for authors is available under the "Guidelines for Authors" section of each journal's main menu.
EDITORIAL ETHICS
Journal editors are responsible for selecting which manuscripts will be accepted for publication. In coordination with their editorial boards, editors establish each journal’s policies and guidelines in compliance with applicable legal requirements regarding plagiarism, defamation, and copyright infringement. Editors may seek assistance from other editors or reviewers in making editorial decisions.
Editors assess each manuscript based solely on its scholarly content, without regard to the author's gender, race, ethnicity, religious beliefs, or political philosophy. During the review process, editors are expected to respect the integrity of the original work and must not alter the manuscript or incorporate unpublished material without the explicit consent of the author.
PEER REVIEWER ETHICS
Each journal uses a peer review process to assist editors in evaluating the quality and suitability of submitted manuscripts. Editors may share reviewers’ feedback with authors to help them improve their manuscripts.
Reviewers must adhere to the following criteria when accepting or declining a manuscript review request:
- Expertise: Reviewers should accept assignments only if they consider themselves knowledgeable and competent in the subject matter.
- Availability: Reviewers must ensure they can complete the review within the stipulated timeframe and follow the journal’s guidelines. If unable to meet the deadline, they should promptly notify the editorial office.
- Confidentiality: Reviewers must treat the manuscript as confidential and refrain from sharing it with third parties without prior editor approval. If a reviewer consults another expert, confidentiality must be preserved and pre-approved by the editor. Editors and editorial staff are the only authorized contacts regarding the review process.
Reviewers who feel unqualified or unable to provide a timely review must inform the editor promptly. Reviewers must remain impartial and avoid conflicts of interest with the manuscript's authors.
The journal follows a double-blind peer review model, in which neither authors nor reviewers are aware of each other’s identities. If a reviewer becomes aware of the author's identity, they must declare any potential conflict of interest and recuse themselves if necessary. Conflicts may include:
- Personal animosity toward the authors.
- Academic or personal proximity (e.g., same institution, department, research group, or co-authorship history).
- Any other professional or personal relationship that could bias judgment.
Reviewers must report any suspected conflict of interest to the editor.
All manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Sharing or discussing the manuscript with others is prohibited unless expressly authorized by the editor, who may require equivalent confidentiality from the third party.
Reviews must be conducted objectively, without personal criticism of the author. Reviewers must clearly express their evaluations and support their conclusions with appropriate reasoning.
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. They must also inform the editor of any substantial similarities between the manuscript under review and other published work.
Peer review applies exclusively to original research articles. Other content—such as book reviews, editorials, or commentary—may not undergo peer review.
Further information on ethical review guidelines is available on the COPE website.
AUTHORSHIP ETHICS
Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study. All such contributors must be listed as co-authors. Others who have contributed meaningfully should be acknowledged as collaborators. The corresponding author must ensure that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the final manuscript and have agreed to its submission.
Authors must disclose any financial or other conflicts of interest that may influence the results or interpretation of the manuscript. All sources of financial support must be properly acknowledged.
Manuscripts reporting original research must provide an accurate account of the work performed, along with an objective discussion of its significance. All supporting data and evidence should be presented truthfully. References should allow others to replicate the study. Submitting deliberately misleading or fabricated data is unethical and unacceptable.
Authors must ensure their work does not include defamatory content or infringe on the intellectual property rights of others. Proper citation of others' work is required.
Authors must provide, upon editor request, the data and evidence underpinning the article and be prepared to make this information available for editorial review and retain it for a reasonable period following publication.
Simultaneous submission of the same manuscript to multiple journals is considered unethical. Authors wishing to withdraw a manuscript under review must formally request withdrawal from the editor.
Authors must appropriately acknowledge the work of others and cite all sources that influenced their research.
Upon acceptance, authors are required to sign a copyright transfer agreement specific to the journal, which will be provided at the time of acceptance.
ETHICAL RESEARCH POLICIES FOR STUDIES INVOLVING HUMAN PARTICIPANT
Research in the social sciences and humanities often involves human participants and specific methodological tools (e.g., surveys, interviews, standardized tests, ethnographic observation, recordings, volunteer experiments, and, occasionally, physical interventions). Therefore, the ethical implications of chosen methodologies must be clearly outlined.
Research must comply with:
- Ethical principles.
- Applicable international, European Union, and national legislation.
This includes ensuring respect for human dignity, equitable distribution of the benefits and burdens of research, and the protection of participants’ values, rights, and interests.
Researchers must also obtain:
- All necessary ethical approvals (where applicable).
- Free and fully informed consent from research participants.
A risk assessment must be included, specifying potential types of harm (e.g., psychological, social, legal, economic, environmental), their likelihood, and the measures taken to mitigate them.
Research with more than minimal risk typically involves:
- Vulnerable populations or individuals unable to give informed consent.
- Sensitive or personal topics that may cause psychological stress or embarrassment.
- Deception.
- Risks to the safety of the researcher.
- Online recruitment (e.g., identifiable images or sensitive topics via social media).
Special consideration must be given to vulnerable groups, including children, patients, minorities, individuals facing discrimination, persons unable to give consent, dissenting voices, immigrants, and sex workers.
If children or others lacking decision-making capacity are involved, researchers must maintain active communication with their legal guardians or caregivers—not only obtaining consent but also allowing them to monitor the research.
Data must be stored securely, and publication—including online dissemination—must not violate agreed anonymity and confidentiality.
In rare cases, confidentiality agreements may be overridden, such as when they shield illegal behavior (e.g., drug trafficking or child abuse) discovered during research. In such instances, disclosure to relevant authorities must be carefully considered and, when feasible, communicated to participants or their guardians.
The technical aspects of data collection and storage must also be considered. Special attention should be given to electronic recording tools (e.g., digital recorders or cameras).
CORRECTIONS IN PUBLISHED WORKS
When an author identifies a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it is their responsibility to notify the journal editor and cooperate in retracting or correcting the article.
If the editor determines that a correction is warranted—particularly in cases of plagiarism, data fabrication, duplicate publication, or undeclared conflicts of interest—the editor will review the situation and decide on a resolution in consultation with the Instituto Nacional de Administración Pública.
