Peer Review Process

The papers received in the Editorial Department will be reviewed by a member of the management team, who will determine if they meet the formal and content requirements indicated in the rules for authors. In the part related to the content, the management team may get advice from the editorial board. If the work does not conform to the rules of the journal, it will be rejected, which will be communicated in a reasoned manner and immediately to the author.

Articles submitted to Ágora. Papeles de Filosofía will be subjected to anonymous 'double blind' evaluation by two experts on the subject. For this task, the collaboration of prestigious national and international professionals will be requested. In the event that the reports are conflicting, a third tiebreaker report will be requested. The evaluators may request the author to make modifications in their work and request a new evaluation. In this case, and for this purpose, a second evaluation round will be opened. The evaluators may also delegate the monitoring of the work re-elaboration process to the journal's management team, which will request advice from the editorial board if necessary. Once the reports are received, the papers will be brought before the editorial board, which will proceed to approve or reject them, a verdict that will be communicated to the authors together with the evaluation reports.

Translations will be sent for evaluation to two experts. They will be accepted when they do not have a negative report; otherwise, they will be rejected. Once the reports have been received, the papers will be brought before the editorial board, which will proceed to approve or reject them, a decision that will be communicated to the authors together with the evaluation reports.

Notification of acceptance or rejection of an article or translation will be sent to the authors within a maximum period of 6 months after receipt of the submission. Originals that are not accepted for editing will be archived.

Reviews will be evaluated anonymously by the journal's management team, which will verify their adequacy in form and content. To this end, they may consult the editorial board if they deem it necessary. The decision adopted will be communicated in a reasoned manner within 1 month of receipt.

Publication Frequency

Ágora is published twice a year.

Open Access Policy

Agora has open access to its full-text content.

There are no processing charges.

Indexed/abstracted in

The journal is indexed in Philosopher's Index, ESCI, ERIH+, PIO, ISOC, Fuente Académica Premier, TOC Premier, DIALNET, SUMARIS CBUC, REDIB and is present at 82,60% of the Spanish universities ioffering philosophical studies (19/23).

Disclaimer and exclusion of liability

Ágora is not responsible for the contents of any article, and the fact of its sponsoring the spreading of an article does not necessarily entail its agreement on the theses exposed in the article.  The editor, in any case, is free of any responsibility resulting from the author’s eventual violation of intellectual property rights.

Review form

Review form

Ethical Guidelines

The publication of scientific articles involves several actors, including the publisher, the editors in chief, the reviewers and the authors. It is expected that each of these agents have an ethical behaviour referred to ethical principles partially inspired in those provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Best Practice Guidelines.

Publisher:

The publisher provides technical assistance and support to the journal editors in the use of the web platform, and maintains the software updated and able to facilitate the submission, evaluation and publication process of scientific works. The publisher also collaborates with the editors in chief indexing the papers, providing information about the databases requirements and, so, contributing to the Journal positioning in the usual rankings. Broadly, the publisher should helps to increase the editorial quality of the Journal, contributing to its visibility, internationalization and impact.

Editors in chief:

Editors in chief ensures that manuscripts submitted are evaluated based exclusively on its intellectual content, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, political affiliation or philosophical trend of the authors. They guarantee the confidentiality of the work, not revealing the identity of the authors to other agents except to those authorized by the publisher, the potential reviewers, the actual reviewers or the editorial board of the journal. Editors can refuse a job if it not satisfy the formal requirements or approach a subject not belonging to the scope of the journal. Editors communicate within the deadlines, once they see the referees and heard the editorial board, the acceptance or rejection of the submitted papers.

Reviewers:

Reviewers should refuse to refer a paper if they do not feel qualified in the subject approached or if they can not take the evaluation within the deadline suggested by the Journal. The referee report should be objective and written in a clearly and reasoned style. Reviewers should avoid ad hominem references and offensive or demeaning comments; their suggestions should focus mainly on the improvement work. Reviewers should treat manuscripts as confidential documents, and their contents is not used in their own works. Reviewers should reject referee papers if they show a conflict of interest, for example a past or present relationship with the paper's authors or the institutions they depend.

Authors:

Authors should submit papers containing original research on a clearly identifiable and not previously published subject. They should not send articles including a substantial part of others papers or books already published. Papers should be written so that they can be understood or replicated by reviewers. If ideas of others are used, they should be clearly referenced; plagiarism is an unacceptable behaviour and its detection involves cancel the submission or remove it from the platform if it was already published. In case of co-authorship, all people that significantly contribute to the paper are considered its author; each author should be able to identify which parts of the work are own and which parts are from others authors, and must maintain confidentiality of the all contents until the article is published. Simultaneous paper sending to other Journals is a sufficient condition for archiving it. If in the process of the paper edition the authors find errors or improprieties, they should communicate to the editors in chief as soon as possible and cooperate in their correction. Authors should communicate the potential conflict of interest between the paper findings and the financial support.

These guidelines are consistent with the ethical code of the University of Santiago de Compostela, institution to which this Journal belongs.

https://www.usc.es/gl/goberno/valedor/codigoetico/CodigoEtico.html

Inclusion and diversity

Use of inclusive language

The journal promotes and encourages the use of an inclusive language that takes into account diversity, promotes respect for all people and is sensitive to differences, thereby promoting social equality and opportunities. For this, care must be taken that the submitted works do not contain jargon, stereotypes, assumptions or prejudices typical of dominant majorities, avoiding negative references to a person due to their age, gender, race, ethnicity, culture, sexual orientation, social class or health condition. Before proceeding with any submission, they must verify that the writing is free of prejudice or bias such as those stated. To do this, it is recommended, for example, to use the neutral gender whenever possible or, when dealing with a disability, to use current and respectful names instead of old and stereotyped terms that may be offensive.

Diversity

The journal favours inclusion and diversity in the field of research of which it is a promoter and disseminator. In particular, it encourages and watches over the increase of underrepresented groups, such as women, people of other ethnic groups or socially disadvantaged groups, in the editorial team and other necessary processes, such as authorship or evaluation of works.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Convention on the Rights of Women

Convention on the Rights of the Child

Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

Corrections, retraction and deletion

Agora journal through the USC publisher is committed to maintaining the integrity of the academic record. Therefore, the articles that have been published will be preserved unaltered as far as possible. However, circumstances may arise in which an article is published that must subsequently be modified, retracted or deleted.

In this sense, the policies of the journal’s editorial board are specified in the following points:

1. - Expressions of concern
2. - Errata and corrections
3. - Withdrawal of an article
4. - Retraction of an article
5. - Deletion of an article.

1. Expressions of concern. The journal’s direction may publish an expression of concern if they believe that readers should be informed of the potentially misleading content of an article. The direction, aware of the repercussions that such action could have on the reputation of its authors, will only publish such expression after consulting an independent expert committee that  reports on the matter. 

2. Errata and corrections. Authors who find misprints or honest errors, once the article is published, must inform the journal about them. Errata that do not affect the understanding of the text (typographical or formatting errors) may be rejected in order to maintain the integrity of the published works. When errors affect the visibility, citation possibilities or correct understanding of the article, a warning of the error will be published together with the metadata of the published article and a note of the error together with the file with the content of the error, and a link will be created between the warning + metadata and the note + file. 

3. Withdrawal of an article. Authors can ask the journal to withdraw their work before publication. To this end, they must send a written request that include a reasoned justification for such request and, in the case of co-authorship, it must be signed by all concerned parties. 

4. Retraction of an article. An article will be retracted if:

• - It had been previously published in another journal or publication medium.
• - It contains false claims of authorship, fraudulent use of data or multiple submission.
• - It includes libelous or gratuitous comments that damage the personal or professional honor of others.
• - It contains conclusions that have been previously published and there are no cross references to them.
• - It has plagiarism or inappropriate authorship.
• - It overlooks a significant conflict of interest during the publication process.
• - There is authorship in dispute The decision to withdraw or delete a work will be made by the journal's direction team, after consulting, if necessary, the drafting committee and under the guidelines of the COPE.

Retractions of published articles are made by publishing a retraction note, linked to the published article and without altering the original article in any way other than to add a prominent link to the note. In this way, the original article remains in the public domain and the retraction note will be indexed.The retraction note will include the title of the work, its authors and a brief description of the reason for the withdrawal. In the PDF version of the article, a watermark will be placed on all its pages indicating that it is retracted; the html and/or xml version, if it exists, will be deleted. There will be no partial retractions. Any retraction is of the entire work. 

5. Deletion of an articleAn article will only be removed from the database when it infringes the legal rights of others or is the subject of a court order. In this circumstance, although the metadata will be preserved, the text will be replaced by a notice indicating that the article has been withdrawn for legal reasons

Referees

Agora. Papeles de Filosofía publishes in the second issue of each year to list of referees of the four previous issues.

Digital preservation policy

This journal develops various processes in order to preserve permanent access to digital objects hosted on its own servers:

- Backups.
- Monitoring of the technological environment to foresee possible migrations of obsolete formats or software.
- Digital preservation metadata.
- Use of DOI.

The files published on this website are available in easily reproducible formats (PDF)

This journal is part of the Public Knowledge Project’s Private LOCKSS Network (PKP-PLN). PKP-PLN generates a decentralized archive system distributed among collaborating libraries in order to create permanent archives of the journal for preservation of the authentic original version of the content and its restoration if necessary.

Anti-plagiarism Policy

This journal is a member of Similarity Check, a multi-publisher initiative started by Crossref to screen published and submitted content for originality.

Through Similarity Check, we use the iThenticate software to detect instances of overlapping and similar text in submitted or published manuscripts.

By depositing all of our content in the Similarity Check database we allow other Similarity Check members to screen their submissions against our published articles.

Interoperability protocols

Agora provides an interface OAI-PMH (Open Archives Initiative – Protocol for Metadata Harvesting) that allows other websites and information services to harvest the published content metadata.

Specifications:

OAI-PMH Protocol Version 2.0
Dublin Core Metadata 1.1

URL for harvesters:
https://revistas.usc.gal/index.php/agora/oai

Sponsors

• Facultade de Filosofía. USC.

Sources of Support

• Xunta de Galicia. Dirección Xeral de Investigación e Desenvolvemento

Journal History

Founded in 1981