Peer Review Process

Tabula Rasa journal follows a double-blind review system, where neither the author will know the identity of their reader, nor the reader that of the author.

Upon receipt of the submissions, the editor and the Editorial Committee of the journal will verify the relevance of the manuscript’s subject content, its overall quality, and compliance with the formal requirements outlined in the author guidelines. Submissions that pass this initial screening will be forwarded to the editor and the Editorial Committee for the selection of appropriate peer reviewers for academic appraisal.

Scholarly peers will receive an invitation to participate as reviewers; if they accept, they will be sent the manuscript for evaluation, along with the corresponding form in which they will record their comments, which will support the decision to accept or decline the manuscript for publication.

Reviewers are given one month to evaluate the article; if they need additional time, they must agree on this with the editor. Once this period has expired, they send the editor their comments and a clear statement on whether they agree with approving the submission in Tabula Rasa.

Irrespective of whether the article is rejected or accepted, the editor will send the author the review report and feedback without revealing the identity of the reviewer(s). If the reports are favorable for publication, the author will have 15 days to send the editor a revised version of the manuscript addressing the reviewers’ comments, along with a letter addressed to Tabula Rasa journal authorizing the publication of their manuscript. Such a letter shall also state the manuscript has not been previously published in another journal or media or is being under review by another journal, and that the article is authored in full by the undersigned.

Peer reviewers

• Peer reviewers are selected by both the Editor and the Editorial Committee. These are experts external to the publishing entity with expertise in the specific topic proposed for review.
• Peer reviewers shall conduct reviews of the manuscripts submitted for their opinion with the utmost rigor.
• They shall fill out the review forms requested by the journal in full.
• Peer reviewers must report any potential conflict of interest to the Editor as soon as they detect it, so that the Editor can assign the submission to another reviewer and resume the due process within the timetable.
• Peer reviewers must provide clear assessments on the manuscripts submitted for review.
• Peer reviewers shall point out whenever they clearly find or suspect plagiarism (or self-plagiarism) and/or falsification or improper manipulation of data.
• Likewise, we encourage our authors to disclose any conflict of interest in the treatment of their topics, and —in the case of collectively written articles— to clearly specify each author’s contribution to the final work, as well as each author’s express statement accepting responsibility for the product to be published.

Ethics Policy and Best Publication Practices

Tabula Rasa adheres to the ethical guidelines for academic publications set out by Elsevier and COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics).

In this line, authors are encouraged to bear in mind the following aspects:

• Carefully ensuring proper attribution of third-party citations in their articles, making appropriate use of direct quotations, paraphrases, or references, and clearly indicating the source.
• Limiting self-citations to a maximum of 5% throughout the manuscript and, whenever possible, to prioritize the use of primary sources.
• Citing transparently data from previous research. Similarly, we reject the practice of redundant publication. As academic publications rely on public funding, in the interest of financial and academic integrity, we consider this practice should be avoided.
• In the same line, we encourage our authors to disclose any conflict of interest related to their topics and—in the case of multi-authored articles—to clearly specify each author’s contribution to the submitted work, as well as each author’s explicit declaration of acceptance of responsibility for the product to be published.

Specifically, on our editorial team duties, authors and peer reviewers shall bear in mind the following:

Editorial Team

• The Editorial Team is in charge of receiving submissions (on behalf of the Editor or associate editors) and must efficiently see to their review, copyediting, and eventual publication.
• The editorial team makes decisions regarding the acceptance or rejection of articles, based on the basic criteria of scientific publications, the quality and relevance of the work presented, and the necessary ethical standards.
• The editorial team should assign evaluations to the most relevant peer reviewers, keeping in mind their academic background and knowledge of the specific topic.
• The editorial team must guarantee the anonymity of authors and peers in the evaluation process, and this anonymity of peer reviewers must be guaranteed after publication.
• The editorial team generally does not consider the use of reviewers proposed by authors, but it does take into account authors’ requests not to use certain reviewers whom the author has asked not to be consulted.
• All manuscripts by members of the Editorial Team and/or the editor must be evaluated by individuals other than members of the journal.

Authors

As stated elsewhere, articles submitted by authors must be original and unpublished, must not have been previously published in other journals, books, blogs, proceedings, websites, or other media (physical or virtual), and must not be under simultaneous review by other journals or publishers.

All authors must declare that the content of their article is their own work and has not been authored by other persons. Authors must respect the intellectual and property rights of other authors or entities, and must therefore explicitly state their authorship and abidance by intellectual and property rights of other persons or entities in a signed letter to the journal.

Peer reviewers

• Peer reviewers are expected to be rigorous in their assessment of manuscripts submitted for their opinion.
• Peer reviewers shall fill out all review forms requested by Tabula Rasa journal.
• Peer reviewers must inform the Editor of any conflict of interest in a timely manner, so that the Editor can find another reviewer and proceed with the review process.
• Peer reviewers must explain clearly their opinions on the manuscripts submitted for review.
• Peer reviewers must report any clear evidence or suspicion of plagiarism (or self-plagiarism) and/or falsification or improper manipulation of data.
• Likewise, we encourage our authors to disclose any conflict of interest in the treatment of their topics, and —in the case of collectively written articles— to clearly specify each author’s contribution to the final work, as well as each author’s express statement accepting responsibility for the product to be published.

Download Document