«Medioevo Greco. Rivista di Storia e Filologia Bizantina» (hereafter «MEG») is a peer-reviewed scientific journal whose policy is inspired by the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) Ethical Code.
See http://publicationethics.org/files/Code_of_conduct_for_journal_editors.pdf.

Publisher’s responsibilities

The Publisher must provide the Journal with adequate resources and the guidance of experts, in order to carry out its role in the most professional way, aiming at the highest quality standard.
The Publisher must have a written agreement that defines the relationship with the owner of the Journal and/or the Editors-in-Chief. The agreement must comply with the Code of Behavior for Publishers of Scientific Journals, as established by COPE.

The relationship among the Editors-in-Chief, the Advisory Board and the Publisher is based on the principle of publishing independence.

The use of any illustrations or photographical elements must be discussed in advance with the Editors-in-Chief. If they are accepted for publication, they shall be supplied in a format technically apt for electronic and printed reproduction, free of any financial or other burden. If these illustrations or other elements cannot be reproduced, the Editors-in-Chief have the right to publish the contribution without them.

The Author’s personal data, collected by the Publisher for the exclusive purposes of the reviewing, editing and publication process, will be kept securely in accordance with data protection guidelines. These data will not be shared with any third parties.

Issues of the journal beginning with the third-to-last in order of publication will be made available in open access on www.medioevogreco.it as well as on the Internet Archive (https://archive.org). Authors implicitly agree on that. Conversely, under no circumstances will contributors be allowed to place their article in the public domain (e.g., by uploading them to sites such as Academia.edu and the like) before two years have passed since publication.

Contributors have the right, after publication of their article(s), to include it(them) in a compilation of own papers in print, respecting an embargo of 2 years from the release of the relevant issue; to reproduce their article(s) in a limited number of copies for personal use, e.g., by way of a support to teaching, lectures and presentations given by the Contributor; to disseminate the contribution within the Author’s own institution, e.g., in an internal protected digital repository – however, respecting the embargo mentioned above.

Editors’ responsibilities

The Editors-in-Chief and the Advisory Board of «MEG» alone are responsible for the decision to publish the articles submitted.

Submitted articles, after having been checked for plagiarism, will be sent to at least two reviewers. Final acceptance presumes the implementation of possible amendments, as required by the reviewers and under the supervision of the of the «MEG» Editors-in-Chief.

The «MEG» Editors-in-Chief and Advisory Board must evaluate each submitted paper in compliance with the Journal’s policy, i.e. exclusively on the basis of its scientific content, without discrimination of race, sex, gender, creed, ethnic origin, citizenship, or the scientific, academic and political position of the Authors.
Submissions of articles by the Advisory or Editorial Board members are also encouraged; however, they will not receive preferential treatment, and will be handled by someone else in or outside the team.

In case the «MEG» Editors-in-Chief and Advisory Board notice or are notified of mistakes or inaccuracies, conflict of interest or plagiarism in a published article, they will immediately warn the Author and the Publisher and will undertake the necessary actions to resolve the issue. They will do their best to correct the published content whenever they are informed that it contains scientific errors or that the authors have committed unethical or illegal acts in connection with their published work. If necessary, they are committed to withdraw the article or publish a recantation.
All complaints are handled in accordance with the guidelines published by the COPE.

Authors’ responsibilities

Authors must follow the Guidelines for Authors.

Authors must explicitly state that their work is original in all its parts and that the submitted paper has not been previously published, nor submitted to other journals, until the entire evaluation process is completed. Since no paper gets published without significant revision, earlier dissemination in conference proceedings or working papers does not preclude consideration for publication, but Authors are expected to entirely disclose publication and/or dissemination of the material in other related publications, so that the overlap can be evaluated by the «MEG» Editors-in-Chief.

The respective roles of each co-author should be described in a footnote.
Authors, under their own responsibility, must avoid any conflict of interest affecting the results obtained or the interpretations suggested. The «MEG» Editor-in-Chiefs will give serious and careful consideration to suggestions of cases in which, due to possible conflict of interest, an Author’s work should not be reviewed by a specific scholar. Authors should indicate any financing agency or the project the article stems from.
When Authors find a factual mistake or an inaccuracy in their own article, they must immediately warn the «MEG» Editors-in-Chief, providing all the information needed to make the due adjustments.
Should the scientific accuracy or reproducibility of the original paper be compromised by mistakes, the journal will publish corrigenda submitted by the original authors.

Reviewers’ responsibilities

By means of the peer-review procedure, reviewers assist the «MEG» Editors-in-Chief and Advisory Board in taking decisions on the articles submitted. They are expected to offer the Authors suggestions as to possible adjustments aimed at improving their contribution.

If a reviewer does not feel up to the task of doing a given review, or if she/he is unable to read the work within the agreed schedule, she/he should notify the «MEG» Editors-in-Chief. Reviewers must not accept articles for which they envisage a conflict of interest due to previous contributions or to a competition with a disclosed author (or with an author they believe to have identified).

The content of the reviewed work must be considered confidential and must not be used without explicit authorisation by the Author, who is to be contacted via the Editor-in-chief. Any confidential information obtained during the peer review process should not be used for other purposes.

Reviewers should see themselves not as adversaries but as advocates for the field. Any comment must be done in a collaborative way and from an objective point of view. Reviewers should clearly motivate their comments and keep in mind the Golden Rule of Reviewing: “Review for others as you would have others review for you”.

Reviewers should report any similarity or overlapping of the work under analysis with other works known to them.