Anti-plagiarism measures
All essays published in Picenum Seraphicum are subject to careful anti-plagiarism checks. The editors are committed to identifying any article that contains falsification of data, irregularities or violations of any kind, plagiarised material, manipulation, overlap or alteration of previously published works that are not adequately cited. In the event of suspected plagiarism in unpublished articles, following verification by the editors and/or referees, the Editorial Committee proceeds in accordance with the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) regarding plagiarism and redundancy “in a submitted article”. If plagiarism is definitively recognised, the Editorial Board contacts the author requesting an explanation, and three scenarios may arise:
- The author does not respond to the request: the editors suspend their decision on the article and, at regular intervals, attempt to contact the author and/or their affiliated institution. The referees are informed of the actions taken;
- The author responds with integrity, satisfactorily demonstrating that they acted in good faith: the editors offer the opportunity to revise the article and resubmit it for publication in the first available issue;
- the author admits guilt or fails to demonstrate satisfactorily that they acted in good faith: the editors communicate the rejection of the article and the reasons for it, specifying what ethical measures to take for future collaborations.
In the event of suspected plagiarism in articles already published, following reports from third parties, the Editorial Board shall proceed in accordance with the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) regarding plagiarism and redundancy "in a published article". If plagiarism is definitively recognised, the Editorial Board shall contact the author requesting an explanation, and three scenarios may arise:
- The author does not respond to the request: the editors regularly attempt to contact the author and/or their affiliated institution. Victims of plagiarism are informed of the actions taken through a formal communication from the editors. For reasons of transparency, readers are informed of the measures taken by means of a notice published in the Editoriale of the first available issue;
- the author responds with integrity, demonstrating satisfactorily that they acted in good faith: the editors offer the opportunity to publish a retraction, which will be included in the Note section of the first available issue. The victims of plagiarism are informed of the actions taken through a formal communication from the editors. For reasons of transparency, readers are informed of the measures taken by means of a notice published in the Editoriale of the first available issue;
- the author admits guilt or fails to demonstrate satisfactorily that they acted in good faith: the editors communicate the withdrawal (disavowal) of the article and the reasons for it; they also inform the authors and publishers who are victims of plagiarism of what has happened. For reasons of transparency, the online version of the article remains available on the platform (except in exceptional cases, such as obvious defamation) but is marked with the word “Withdrawn”; finally, readers are informed of the measures taken by means of a notice published in the Editoriale of the first available issue.
