Codice etico e Open Access Policy

Codice etico e Open Access Policy

February 2024

Studi di Sociologia is published by Vita e Pensiero, the publisher of Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore. Vita e Pensiero is committed to meeting and upholding ethical standards during all the stages of publishing, according to COPE and the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors ( The Editorial Board should meet regularly (at least once a year, also by telematic conference) to gauge their opinions about the running of the journal, define any changes to journal policies, and identify future challenge. The Editorial Board in cooperation with the editor in chief, shall monitor the performance of peer reviewers and take steps to ensure this is of high quality, develop and maintain a database of suitable reviewers, and update this on the basis of reviewer performance; use a wide range of sources (not just personal contacts) to identify potential new reviewers (e.g. author suggestions, bibliographic databases). It shall encourage reviewers to ensure the originality of submissions and be alert to redundant publication and plagiarism. 

The act of publishing involves many parties, each of which plays an important role in achieving aims such as high standards of reliability, rigor and scientific quality. It therefore follows that the Editor-in-chief, editorial board, scientific Committee and editors have responsibilities to meet expected ethical standards at all stages in their involvement from submission to publication and dissemination of an article.

Editor-in chief and editors’ duties and responsibilities

  • The editor in chief, with the cooperation of the editorial board and editors of each number, is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor-in chief and the editors may confer with other editors, members of the scientific committee or reviewers in making this decision.
  • Te editor in chief at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
  • The editor in chief and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
  • The editor in chief and the editors of each volume should handle submissions for sponsored supplements or special issues in the same way as other submissions, so that articles are considered and accepted solely on their academic merit and without commercial influence.
  • The editor in chief and the editors should inform readers about who has funded research or other scholarly work and whether the funders had any role in the research and its publication.
  • The editor in chief, the editorial board and the editorial staff should adopt and follow reasonable procedures in the event of complaints of an ethical or conflict nature. The editor in chiefshould give authors a reasonable opportunity to respond to any complaints. All complaints should be investigated no matter when the original publication was approved. Documentation associated with any such complaints should be retained.
  • The editor in chief, the editorial board and editors have the responsibility to select suitably qualified and competent reviewers for which there are no conflicts of interest with respect to the article assigned to them for the review process.
  • If an author and the Editor or one of the Co-Editors share the same institution, the paper will be assigned to another Co-Editor or an Associate Editor from a different institution. The Editor or Co-Editor affiliated with the author’s institution will not participate in referee selection or decision-making regarding the paper. Any perceived conflict of interest will be disclosed by the Editor or Co-Editors to the Editorial Board, and the submission will be managed accordingly.

Reviewers’ duties and responsibilities

  • The review process consists of a double-blind peer review.
  • Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
  • Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor in chief.
  • Reviews should be conducted objectively evaluating the scientific relevance of the article, the bibliographic richness, the understandability of the text, the absence of errors. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation.
  • A reviewer should also alert the editor in chief to any published or submitted content that is substantially similar to that under review.
  • Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Authors' duties and responsibilities
  • Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
  • The authors should ensure that the have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
  • The authors must notify the editor in chief if their article has been proposed for publication to other journals. In absence of editor in chief’s authorization (according to the publisher), the author cannot publish, in other journals, articles published in the journal or due to be published in the journal, or articles that describe the contents of the same research.
  • Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
  • Authors should maintain accurate records of data associated with their submitted manuscript, and to supply or provide access to these data, on reasonable request.
  • Authors should confirm/assert that the manuscript as submitted is not under consideration or accepted for publication elsewhere. Where portions of the content overlap with published or submitted content, he/she has to acknowledge and cite those sources. 
  • Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
  • Authors should obtain express permission from human subjects and respect their privacy for any studies involving human, or animal subjects conform to national, local and institutional laws and requirements (i.e. WMA Declaration of Helsinki, NIH Policy on Use of laboratory Animals, EU Directive on Use of Animals) and confirm that approval has been sought and obtained where appropriate.
  • Authors should declare any potential conflicts of interest (i.e. where the author has a competing interest (real or apparent) that could be considered or viewed as exerting an undue influence on his or her duties at any stage during the publication process). 
  • Authors should notify promptly the journal editor in chief or publisher if a significant error in their publication is identified. They must cooperate with the editors and publisher to publish an erratum, addendum, corrigendum notice, or to retract the paper, where this is deemed necessary.

Content sharing – Open access policy

Author’s fee

The accepted articles in the journals are published, in print and electronic version, free of charges for the author or related institutions.
Each author can contractually choose to share the final processed and published PDF of his/her article (gold open access). This option requires an article processing charge of € 500.00 for each article (see Open Access policy for details).

Procedures For Dealing With Unethical Behaviour

Misconduct and unethical behavior may be identified and brought to the attention of the editor in chief and publisher at any time, by anyone. Whoever informs the editor in chief or publisher of such conduct should provide sufficient information and evidence in order for an investigation to be initiated.
All allegations should be taken seriously and treated in the same way, until a successful decision or conclusion is reached. An initial decision should be taken by the editor in chief, who should consult with or seek advice from the editorial board, the scientific committee and the publisher, if appropriate.
Evidence should be gathered, while not divulging any allegation beyond the parties directly involved.
In any event, the author should be given the opportunity to respond to allegations. Where an improper behavior by a reviewer or an editor is ascertained, he/she will no longer be considered by the journal as a possible reviewer or editor. Where an improper behavior is discovered by an author, he / she will no longer be able to make a submission to the journal for a period commensurate with the seriousness of the violation committed. If necessary, a note with the description of irregular behaviors will be published in the number following the verification in order to inform the readers.


Inserire il codice per attivare il servizio.