Ambito di interesse
«Popolazione e storia» si propone di discutere della popolazione, dei suoi meccanismi evolutivi, delle sue caratterizzazioni e dei suoi condizionamenti. Ricostruire gli eventi della vita e analizzarli con metodi quantitativi vuol dire riconoscere alle circostanze demografiche tutta la loro importanza, studiarle percorrendo anche nuove strade, cercando nuovi modi di pensare la realtà per arrivare a spiegazioni e verifiche dei processi di vita di una popolazione, quali che siano le sue dimensioni e la sua collocazione dentro una data società. La rivista non vuole circoscrivere il proprio spazio di indagine alla sola storia italiana, ma aprirsi anche ad altre realtà, prestando attenzione al lavoro di ricerca condotto in altri paesi.
Publication Ethics
PUBLICATION ETHICS AND PUBLICATION MALPRACTICE STATEMENT The peer-reviewed «Popolazione e storia» is a official publication of the Italian Society of Historical Demography (Società Italiana di Demografia Storica). The publication of an article in the journal is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behaviour for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher, the society and the association. The Italian Society of Historical Demography takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing seriously and we recognise our ethical and other responsibilities.
We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, the Editorial Board of «Popolazione e storia» will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary. Publication decisions and Editor’s duties The editorial board members of the journal (editor-in-chief and co-editors) are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editorial board is guided by the policies of the journal’s publisher and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editorial board seeks the support of at least two members of the scientific advisory board or other reviewers in making this decision, according to a double-blind peer review procedure. Fair play An editor, at any time, must be evaluating manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, as well as scientific, academic, or political orientation of the authors.
Confidentiality The editors 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. Disclosure, conflicts of interest, and other issues The editor will be guided by COPE’s Guidelines for Retracting Articles when considering retracting, issuing expressions of concern about, and issuing corrections pertaining to articles that have been published in the journal. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the expressed written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. The editor should recuse himself/herself from handling manuscripts (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor, or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers. The editor should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern. Involvement and Cooperation in Investigations An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies, and if the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant. Every reported act of unethical publishing behaviour must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication. Peer reviewer’s duties Contribution to editorial decisions Peer review is an essential component of scholarly communication. 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. Promptness Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself/herself from the review process. Confidentiality Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorised by the editor. Standards of objectivity Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Acknowledgement of sources 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 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. Disclosure and conflict of interest 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 manuscript. Author’s duties Reporting standards 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. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial ‘opinion’ works should be clearly identified as such. Data access and retention Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication. Originality and plagiarism The authors should ensure that they 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. Plagiarism takes many forms, from 'passing off' another's paper as the author's own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper. Acknowledgement of sources 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. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services. Authorship of a paper 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, having agreed to its submission for publication. Hazards and human or animal subjects If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed. Disclosure and conflict of interest All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Fundamental errors in published works When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper. (Based on Elsevier Recommendations and COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors)
Submission libera
Indicizzato