Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The Bulletin of the Natural History Society of the Balearic Islands (Bolletí de la Societat d’Història Natural de les Balears -BSHNB-) (https://bshnb.shnb.org/) is an annual periodical published by a Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) based in Mallorca (Balearic Islands, Spain), the Natural History Society of the Balearic Islands (SHNB). The SHNB is an entity declared by the Ministry of the Interior of Public Utility (BOE no. 40, of February 15, 2007. Order INT/298/2007, of January 29, by which they are declared of public utility various associations.

The BSHNB was founded in 1954 and publishes natural history articles, in a broad sense, preferably from the western Mediterranean. SHNB publishes a Bulletin containing peer reviewed scientific and technical articles related to natural history. BSHNB is publishing the Bulletin as a single-blind peer reviewed international publication dedicated to following best practices on ethical matters, errors, retractions and to deliver the highest standards of publication ethics. We uphold the best standard and take all possible measures against publication malpractices. All articles not in accordance with Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement standards will be removed from the publication if malpractice is discovered at any time even after the publication. BSHNB is checking all papers in a single-blind peer review process.

The Editorial Committee is responsible for, among the other, for deciding which of the research papers/articles submitted to the bulletin should be published and preventing publication malpractice. Unethical behaviour is unacceptable and the European Safeguards Research and Development Association does not tolerate plagiarism in any form.

Editors’ Responsibilities

Publication Decisions: The editor is accountable for everything published in the bulletin and strives to meet the needs of readers and authors. The Editor’s decisions to accept or reject a paper for publication should be based on the editorial committee’s reviews and paper’s importance.

Review of Manuscripts: The editor ensures that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor, who may make use of appropriate means, to examine the originality of the contents of the manuscript and ensure the quality of the material they publish.

Fair Review: The bulletin editor strives to ensure that peer review of the bulletin is fair, unbiased and timely. The editor ensures that each manuscript received is evaluated on its intellectual content without regard to authors’ sex, gender, race, religion, citizenship, etc.

Confidentiality: The editor 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 must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: The editor requires reviewers to disclose any potential competing interests before agreeing to review a submission.

Authors’ Responsibilities

Reporting Standards: Authors should precisely present their original research, as well as objectively discuss its significance. Manuscripts are to be edited in accordance to the submission guidelines of the bulletin.

Originality: Authors must certify that their work is entirely unique and original.

Redundancy: Authors should not concurrently submit papers describing essentially the same research. Submitting the same paper to more than one bulletin/journal constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of Sources: Author(s) should acknowledge all sources of data used in the research and cite publications that have influenced their research.

Authorship of the Paper: Authorship should be limited only to those who have made a significant contribution to conceiving, designing, executing and/or interpreting the submitted study. All those who have significantly contributed to the study should be listed as co- authors. The corresponding author should also ensure that all the authors and co-authors have seen and approved the final submitted version of the manuscript and their inclusion as co-authors.

Data Access and Retention: Authors should retain raw data related to their submitted paper, and must provide it for editorial review, upon request of the editor.

Fundamental errors in published works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her submitted manuscript, the author must immediately notify the editor.

Reviewers’ Responsibilities

Confidentiality: Manuscript reviewers, the editor and the editorial staff must not disclose any information regarding submitted manuscripts. All submitted manuscripts are to be treated as privileged information. Editors should provide guidance to reviewers on everything that is expected of them including the need to handle submitted material in confidence.

Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Standards of Objectivity: Review of submitted manuscripts will be conducted objectively. The reviewers shall express their views clearly, with supporting arguments. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.

Promptness: If a reviewer believes it is not possible for him/her to review the research reported in a manuscript within the designated guidelines, or within stipulated time, he/she should notify the editor, so that the accurate and timely review can be ensured.

Conflict of Interest: All reviewers should have no conflict of interest with respect to the research, the authors and/or the funding bodies.

Change or Modification of Published Paper

Withdrawal: The published papers will be withdrawn if the author(s) noticed significant errors. Before accepting the withdrawal request, the editorial committee and Editor-in-chief should talk with the author(s) sufficiently. If the paper is agreed to be withdrawn, the following should follow:

• The paper in bulletin database should be removed.
  • The link in online publication site should be removed.
  • Next phrase or similar phrase to announce the reason should be shown below the paper title in online publication paper list: (This paper was withdrawn because of some technical errors).

Replacement: The papers published can be replaced if the author(s) send an updated paper. Before accepting the replacement request, the editorial board and Editor-in-chief should talk with author(s) sufficiently, and at least three reviewers should check the changes. If the paper were replaced, the following should follow:

• The paper in bulletin database should be replaced.
  • Link in online publication site should be replaced.
  • Next phrase or similar phrase to announce the reason should be shown below the paper title in online publication paper list: (This paper was replaced because author(s) sent an updated version. Contact editor if you want to check the old version).
  • Old version should be kept separately, and if someone wants to check the old version, the editor can send the PDF to him/her.
  • Note, the replacement is acceptable only one time, and only for technical advances. Removal: The published papers will be removed if reviewers, readers, librarians, publishers or other subjects noticed a significant errors or plagiarism. Before removing a paper, editorial board and Editor-in-chief should talk with authors sufficiently, and should provide enough time to have authors’ explanation. If the paper is removed, then it follows that,
  • The paper in bulletin database should be removed.
  • The link in online publication site should be removed.
  • Next phrase or similar phrase to announce the reason should be shown below the paper title in online publication paper list: (This paper was removed because of plagiarism).

Penalties

Double Submission: If double submission was found or noticed from other sources, the editorial board should check the status. If the double submission was confirmed as an intentional thing, then the following actions must be imposed:

• Review process will be terminated
  • The reason should be sent to reviewers, editorial board and authors.
  • All authors’ name will be marked as black list, and these authors cannot submit any paper to all BSHNB bulletins for three years.

Double Publication: If double publication was found or noticed from other sources, editorial board should check the status. If the double publication was confirmed as an intentional thing, then the following actions will be carried out:

• This should be reported to the editorial board and author(s).
  • This should be sent to the publisher who published the same (or very similar) paper.
  • Paper will be removed according to the “Removal” part in section 4.
  • All authors’ name will be marked as black list, and these authors cannot submit any paper to all BSHNB bulletins for three years.

Plagiarism: If plagiarism (including self-plagiarism) was found or noticed from other sources, the editorial board should check the status. If the plagiarism (including self-plagiarism) was confirmed as an intentional thing, then the following actions will be carried out:

• This should be reported to the editorial board and authors,
  • This should be sent to the publisher who published same or similar paper,
  • Paper will be removed according to the “Removal” part in section 4,
  • All authors’ name will be marked as black list, and this author(s) cannot submit any paper to all BSHNB bulletins for five years.

Any interested party may report potential irregularities to the Editorial Board, including the relevant information, to the following email address: publicacions@shnb.org