<!-- wp:heading -->
<h2 id="i-for-authors"><strong>I. For authors</strong><strong></strong></h2>
<!-- /wp:heading -->

<!-- wp:heading {"level":3} -->
<h3 id="i-1-open-access-and-copyright-policies"><strong>I.1. Open access and copyright policies</strong></h3>
<!-- /wp:heading -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>Every article and chapter published by ColNes Publishing is of open access, meaning they are freely available without any kind of subscription or restriction. They are distributed under the terms of the&nbsp;<a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0)</a>,&nbsp;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&nbsp;<a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/legalcode">here</a>.</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:heading {"level":3} -->
<h3 id="i-2-article-processing-charges-apcs"><strong>I.2. Article Processing Charges (APCs)</strong></h3>
<!-- /wp:heading -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>There is no fee or charges applied for chapters/books processing and/or publication.</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:heading {"level":3} -->
<h3 id="i-3-editorial-process"><strong>I.3. Editorial process</strong></h3>
<!-- /wp:heading -->

<!-- wp:heading {"level":4} -->
<h4 id="i-3-1-post-submission-stage"><strong>I.3.1. Post-submission stage</strong></h4>
<!-- /wp:heading -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>Once a journal article, book chapter, or book proposal is submitted, the Editor(s) check its content relevance, completeness of metadata, technical quality, and presentation. At this stage, the Editor might reject the proposal if he/she considers it as not suitable for peer review.</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:heading {"level":4} -->
<h4 id="i-3-2-editorial-assignment-and-review-phase"><strong>I.3.2. Editorial assignment and review phase</strong></h4>
<!-- /wp:heading -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>When the Editor moves the journal article, book chapter, or book proposal to the peer review phase, two potential reviewers of considerable expertise in the field are assigned. The peer-review process operates using the double-blind model. Reviewers perform voluntary work; nevertheless, they are asked to consider the timeliness, confidentiality, possible conflict of interests, and ethical behavior.</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:heading {"level":4} -->
<h4 id="i-3-3-editorial-decision"><strong>I.3.3. Editorial decision</strong></h4>
<!-- /wp:heading -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>Once the review process is completed, the Editor makes a final decision, which can be one of the following:</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:list -->
<ul><li>Accepted</li><li>Considered with minor revisions</li><li>Considered with major revisions</li><li>Rejected</li></ul>
<!-- /wp:list -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>When manuscripts 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 works are accepted in their current form may receive comments regarding the editorial guidelines to publish the final version. After all the required review rounds, the author(s) addresses all the comments raised by the reviewers and/or editors.</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:heading {"level":3} -->
<h3 id="i-4-editorial-policies"><strong>I.4. Editorial policies</strong></h3>
<!-- /wp:heading -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>We ensure the publication of high-quality content derived from transparent and trusted research practices. We follow all the guidelines and best publication practices defined by the Committee of Publication Ethics (<a href="https://publicationethics.org/">COPE</a>).</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:heading {"level":4} -->
<h4 id="i-4-1-authorship"><strong>I.4.1. Authorship</strong></h4>
<!-- /wp:heading -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>ColNes Publishing demands that all authors listed in the journal articles, book chapters, and books 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 exclude people who did contribute. Its name is not finally included (Ghost authors). To prevent so, it is strongly recommended to decide the authorship before the project writing.</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>Before considering a manuscript 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&nbsp;<a href="mailto:EditorialOffice@colnes.org">Editorial Office</a>&nbsp;during the evaluation, production, and post-publication processes.</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>A&nbsp;<em>Contribution Statement</em>&nbsp;needs to be submitted together with the journal articles and book chapters where the roles per author are described, based on the&nbsp;<a href="https://casrai.org/credit/">CRediT</a> taxonomy. This information will be published together with the full text. All those whose contributions are not listed in this Taxonomy; their names can be listed in the&nbsp;<strong><em>Acknowledgements</em></strong>&nbsp;section.</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>In case someone requests to withdraw his/her name from a journal article or book chapter, or even claim for inclusion, a formal declaration needs to be submitted to the <a href="mailto:EditorialOffice@colnes.org">Editorial Office</a>. This request will be considered once a letter of agreement is signed by all authors.</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:heading {"level":4} -->
<h4 id="i-4-2-complaints"><strong>I.4.2. Complaints</strong></h4>
<!-- /wp:heading -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>Any allegation of misconduct or questionable practice must be reported to the <a href="mailto:EditorialOffice@colnes.org">Editorial Office</a> during the pre-or post-publication stages. We will follow the COPE’s Core Practices to decide on any ethical issue.</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:heading {"level":4} -->
<h4 id="i-4-3-conflict-of-interest"><strong>I.4.3. Conflict of interest</strong></h4>
<!-- /wp:heading -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>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. Using this statement, the following issues might be declared:</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:list -->
<ul><li>Direct or indirect resources are received by any institution to complete the research work.</li><li>Financial relationships with entities that supported the performance of the research work.</li><li>Patents and copyrights, whether pending, issued, licensed, and/or receiving royalties related to the research work.</li><li>Personal relationships with people who can influence the research content.</li></ul>
<!-- /wp:list -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>These are some examples of COI statements:</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:list -->
<ul><li>⦍Author name⦎ has received ⦍state the received benefits⦎ from ⦍Institution name or equivalent⦎.</li><li>⦍Author name⦎ has ⦍type of relationship⦎ with ⦍Institution name or equivalent⦎.</li></ul>
<!-- /wp:list -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>If there is no conflict of interest, the authors must declare:</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:list -->
<ul><li>The author(s) declare that there is no conflict of interest.</li></ul>
<!-- /wp:list -->

<!-- wp:heading {"level":4} -->
<h4 id="i-4-4-research-data-reproducibility-and-transparency"><strong>I.4.4. Research data, reproducibility, and transparency</strong></h4>
<!-- /wp:heading -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>The authors are encouraged to share the data behind the research work. Our policy is to make all scientific data of open access since we follow the&nbsp;<a href="http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/grants_manual/hi/oa_pilot/h2020-hi-oa-pilot-guide_en.pdf">Guidelines on Open Access to Scientific Publications and Research Data defined by the European Commission</a>. The data sharing process can occur in the following ways:</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:list -->
<ul><li>Depositing data in a public repository. The&nbsp;<a href="https://www.re3data.org/">Registry of Research Data Repositories</a> can be of help in selecting a platform to host the data. The link(s) to access the data should be included in the manuscript.</li><li>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 manuscript's main text.</li><li>Data on request. Before the publication process, authors may be asked for research data at the request of the editors or reviewers.</li></ul>
<!-- /wp:list -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>Citations to research data should appear in the full text in the reference section. Authors need to follow the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.force11.org/datacitationprinciples">Joint Declaration of Data Citation Principles</a>&nbsp;to provide the correct citation and referencing of the data.</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:heading {"level":4} -->
<h4 id="i-4-5-statement-of-data-consent"><strong>I.4.5. Statement of data consent</strong></h4>
<!-- /wp:heading -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>To make science more transparent, open, and reproducible, we encourage authors to submit a data statement, which will be publicly available. These are some examples:</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:list -->
<ul><li>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).</li><li>The (Name/type of data) generated during the development of this study has been included in the manuscript.</li><li>The (Name/type of data) generated during the development of this study has been published as supplementary material.</li><li>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).</li><li>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).</li><li>No data have been generated during the development of this study.</li></ul>
<!-- /wp:list -->

<!-- wp:heading {"level":4} -->
<h4 id="i-4-6-post-publication-discussions-corrections-and-retractions"><strong>I.4.6. Post-publication discussions, corrections, and retractions</strong></h4>
<!-- /wp:heading -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>Retractions and corrections occur when once a chapter/book 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&nbsp;<a href="https://publicationethics.org/files/retraction-guidelines.pdf">COPE’s Guidelines</a>.</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:heading {"level":3} -->
<h3 id="i-5-preprints"><strong>I. 5. Preprints</strong></h3>
<!-- /wp:heading -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>Authors can use preprint servers to host their chapters before submission to the book series. This will not count as multiple or redundant publications. Some of the preprint servers that can be used are&nbsp;<a href="https://arxiv.org/">ArXiv</a>,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.ssrn.com/index.cfm/en/">SSRN</a>, <a href="https://www.biorxiv.org/">bioRxiv</a>,&nbsp;<a href="https://psyarxiv.com/">psyArXiv</a>,&nbsp;<a href="https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv">SocArXiv</a>,&nbsp;<a href="https://engrxiv.org/">engrXiv</a>,&nbsp;<a href="http://eprints.rclis.org/">e-LIS</a>,&nbsp;<a href="http://repec.org/">RePEc</a>, etc.</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:heading -->
<h2 id="ii-for-reviewers"><strong>II. For reviewers</strong><strong></strong></h2>
<!-- /wp:heading -->

<!-- wp:heading {"level":3} -->
<h3 id="ii-1-peer-reviewing-for-colnes-publishing"><strong>II.1. Peer reviewing for ColNes Publishing</strong></h3>
<!-- /wp:heading -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>Peer-reviewers lie at the core of the scholarly publishing process since they play a critical role in content quality control. For that reason, we encourage the reviewers to submit comprehensive, constructive, objective, and transparent reports.</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>There are two ways to become a reviewer, either by direct invitation from a journal or book series’ 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.</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>Accepting a review invitation implies the following:</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:list -->
<ul><li>Agree to review only if you have the required expertise to assess the book/chapter.</li><li>Provide accurate personal and professional contact information to the editors.</li><li>Accept if there are no conflicting interests with the authors. Competing interests may be of personal, financial, intellectual, professional, political, or religious nature.</li><li>Follow the publisher guidelines on peer review.</li><li>Undertake a response to the peer review within the required timeframe.</li></ul>
<!-- /wp:list -->

<!-- wp:heading {"level":3} -->
<h3 id="ii-2-steps-to-conduct-a-review"><strong>II.2. Steps to conduct a review</strong></h3>
<!-- /wp:heading -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>Read the paper and any supplementary material, if exists. In case of missing materials or incomplete information, contact only the editor.</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:list -->
<ul><li>Confidentiality during the peer review process is highly important. For that reason, do not use information derived from this process for your own or others’ benefits; anyone else can be involved in the review of the material.</li><li>If during the review process, a competing interest is discovered, the editor needs to be notified.</li></ul>
<!-- /wp:list -->

<!-- wp:heading {"level":3} -->
<h3 id="ii-3-writing-the-review-report"><strong>II.3. Writing the review report</strong></h3>
<!-- /wp:heading -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>The review report should be written in the format required by the publisher.</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:list -->
<ul><li>Reviewers are encouraged to be objective and constructive and, if possible, provide references to support general statements. Notice that peer review aims to help authors to improve the manuscript.</li><li>As a reviewer, you are allowed to provide confidential comments to the editor as well as a recommendation to <em>accept</em>, <em>consider with minor revisions</em>, <em>consider with major revisions</em>, or <em>reject </em>the manuscript. 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.</li><li>The following criteria are asked at the time to assess the paper:<ul><li>The objective, methodology, and results are consistent.</li><li>The research questions or hypotheses are valid.</li><li>The study is original.</li><li>Previous research findings have been presented, discussed, and compared with the results of the study.</li><li>The language and presentation of the figures and tables are clear.</li><li>The references are complete and coherent with the content of the paper and the status of the field.</li></ul></li></ul>
<!-- /wp:list -->

<!-- wp:heading {"level":3} -->
<h3 id="ii-4-publication-ethics"><strong>II.4. Publication ethics</strong></h3>
<!-- /wp:heading -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>Our editorial practices are inspired by the COPE Guidelines. For that reason, we invite reviewers to deepen into the&nbsp;<a href="https://publicationethics.org/files/Ethical_Guidelines_For_Peer_Reviewers_2.pdf">COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers</a>. Any suspicious of misconduct during the review process should be informed to the&nbsp;<a href="mailto:EditorialOffice@colnes.org">Editorial Office</a>.</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:heading {"level":3} -->
<h3 id="ii-5-acknowledgment-to-reviewers"><strong>II.5 Acknowledgment to reviewers</strong></h3>
<!-- /wp:heading -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>All those who have acted as reviewers, their names will be publicly available on the publisher’s website.</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:heading -->
<h2 id="iii-for-editors"><strong>III. For editors</strong><strong></strong></h2>
<!-- /wp:heading -->

<!-- wp:heading {"level":3} -->
<h3 id="iii-1-editors-roles-and-responsibilities"><strong>III.1. Editors’ roles and responsibilities</strong></h3>
<!-- /wp:heading -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>The editors oversee:</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:list -->
<ul><li>Make initial reviews of journal articles, chapters, and full books to ensure that they are within the thematic scope of the series and that they meet the basic requirements for possible peer review.</li><li>Manage materials if they are within their research area, if not, a member of the editorial committee can be designated to act as handling editor.</li><li>Evaluate possible conflicts of interest that affect the transparency of the editorial process.</li><li>Invite a minimum of two reviewers per manuscript.</li><li>Make decisions regarding peer-reviewed materials.</li><li>Ensure that the deadlines established within the editorial process are met.</li><li>Suggest changes to the thematic scope of the series.</li><li>Assess special issues, edited volumes, and monographs proposals.</li><li>Promote the publication title (either journal, book series, or proceedings).</li><li>Manage the editorial team, which means they can remove inactive members and bring new members who are experts in the field.</li></ul>
<!-- /wp:list -->

<!-- wp:heading {"level":3} -->
<h3 id="iii-2-peer-review-and-decision-making"><strong>III.2. Peer review and decision making</strong></h3>
<!-- /wp:heading -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>Peer review ensures that the published materials have 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:</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:list -->
<ul><li>Initial review to ensure that the paper complies with a minimum of quality in terms of content and format.</li><li>Invite two potential reviewers directly and carry out the remaining editorial process.</li><li>Invite two potential reviewers to assess the content of the manuscript. Reviewers should be experts in the topic they are proposing to assess, they must not be affiliated with the authors’ institution, and both reviewers should not belong to the same institution.</li><li>Make a final decision based on the reviewers’ comments. If the reviewers’ reports are completely opposed, a third reviewer needs to be invited. The review process closes when the chapter/book has gone through all the necessary review rounds and the author has considered all recommendations. The decisions to make will be the following:<ul><li>Accepted</li><li>Considered with minor revisions</li><li>Considered with major revisions</li><li>Rejected</li></ul></li></ul>
<!-- /wp:list -->

<!-- wp:heading {"level":3} -->
<h3 id="iii-3-accepting-thematic-issues-and-volumes"><strong>III.3. Accepting thematic issues and volumes</strong></h3>
<!-- /wp:heading -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>Organizing special issues and edited volumes is a good opportunity for publishing articles and chapters on a certain emerging topic. Editors should assess all the proposals from the point of view of its scope and the team of editors behind it, that is, the prospective Guest Editors.</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:heading {"level":3} -->
<h3 id="iii-4-publication-ethics"><strong>III.4. Publication ethics</strong></h3>
<!-- /wp:heading -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>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&nbsp;<a href="mailto:EditorialOffice@colnes.org">Editorial Office</a>. We will follow the&nbsp;<a href="https://publicationethics.org/files/retraction-guidelines.pdf">COPE’s Guidelines</a>&nbsp;to proceed in every single case.</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->