The journal MUNIBE, which has been published by the Aranzadi Society of Sciences since 1949, was divided into the journals Munibe Antropologia-Arkeologia and Munibe Ciencias Naturales in 1985. Munibe Antropologia-Arkeologia is distributed to over 2,000 researchers and specialised libraries and is indexed in the following databases: SCOPUS, GEOREF, ANTHROPOLOGICAL LITERATURE AND ISOC. Since 2013, Munibe Antropologia-Arkeologia has been included in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) and is therefore a full open-access journal. Users of the website (http://www.aranzadi.eus/munibe-antropologia-arkeologia?lang=en“) are free to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search or link to the full content of each article.
Munibe Antropologia-Arkeologia is published in two formats: as collections of miscellaneous articles or monographic issues of the journal. Furthermore, the serialised monographic issues that thus far have been published under the single title of Munibe Suplemento will now be divided into two series, each assigned to the respective Editorial Boards of Munibe Antropologia-Arkeologia and Munibe Ciencias Naturales. More specifically, the series that will publish content relating to our areas of expertise will be Munibe Monographs. Anthropology and Archaeology Series, apart from the annual series.
The journal will deal with issues associated with all aspects of Anthropology (Physical, Biological, Cultural, Social, etc.) and Archaeology (both pre-historic and historic). Although south-western Europe will be the journal’s priority geographical area, Munibe Antropologia-Arkeologia is a journal with an international focus. Scientific articles must demonstrate the relevance of the different cases presented, or the specific case described, within a global context, far beyond any regional interests. This must be reflected in the title of the paper, the introduction to the article, the initial hypothesis, the discussion and/or the critical section. Manuscripts will be rejected if the overall relevance of the issues addressed is not demonstrated and if they do not sufficiently cover other contemporary or similar cases that can give the article a global scope. The journal’s publishing standards, the guidelines for sending originals and the publishing code of ethics will appear on the journal’s website (http://www.aranzadi.eus/guia-para-los-autores?lang=en) and will be constantly updated.
The journal only accepts scientific texts that have not been published (not even partially) and which are not simultaneously being evaluated by another journal. Preferably, articles that have been written in the following languages will be accepted: Basque, Spanish, English or French. Taking into account the specific nature of each area of expertise, they will be considered originals in other languages. There will be two yearly issues of the journal Munibe Antropologia-Arkeologia. In the month of July the articles that have been evaluated and corrected up to that date will be published in digital format (online first). In the month of December, the second issue of the journal will be published in both the digital and print formats, with the articles from both issues being included in this second issue. Among other considerations, these new publication rules will also mean that there is no longer any deadline for submitting articles to be evaluated, and henceforth will be left permanently open. When a manuscript has been received for evaluation, the respective author will receive an acknowledgement of receipt form that they must fill in with all of the details required for the editorial staff to contact them and return it signed, confirming their acceptance of the terms for the evaluation and dissemination of the manuscript, if it meets the quality requirements established by the journal and is completely original. The date of receipt of an original, which will appear in the header of the published version, refers to the date on which this completed and signed acknowledgement of receipt form is received at the journal’s offices.
For the version of the journal with miscellaneous articles, three types of contributions will be accepted: research articles (with a maximum length of 7,500 words extended English abstract included), notes on progress and developments (up to 2,500 words) and reviews (up to 2,000 words). The author may send an attachment with unlimited additional material in an editable format (Word, Excel). This material will feature a heading that will properly identify the corresponding article.
All manuscripts must be submitted via telematics means (firstname.lastname@example.org). The initial pages of the text must include the following information: the title of the paper in the language in which it is written, and always in Spanish and English; a maximum of five keywords, not included in the title, in the same languages; an abstract of the paper (maximum 150 words in the language of the article and, where required, in Spanish; if the article is not written in English, the English abstract should be increased to 500 words), and in Basque (the journal will be responsible for this translation when papers are sent from outside the Basque Country); the full name of the author(s), the order of the signatures in the article and the research centre to which they belong (for the first signatory, a full postal address and email address, for correspondence). All captions below illustrations, figures and tables must be translated into English if this is not the article’s original language. The English used for the article and, where applicable, for the translation of the title, the extended abstract and the captions below figures and tables, must meet the normal quality requirements for academic journals. In turn, the title of the paper must not give rise to ambiguities of any kind. Articles relating to archaeological contexts should include a time reference and, where appropriate, geography with a broad regional scale (such as the Iberian Peninsula, Italy or Great Britain).
The texts should be written (or converted) on a common operating system and word processor (preferably versions of Word). Papers may include different sections and subsections, in which case they should be clearly specified (sections in bold and underlined and subs-sections only in bold) and their titles should be organised hierarchically (with Arabic numerals, for example “2.” for sections and “2.4” for subsections). In any event there must always be a final section containing the general overview of the article or the conclusions derived from it. Any reference to the research projects or groups of the authors who have contributed to the paper should always be included at the end of the article, in an unnumbered acknowledgements section. Below this, the bibliography of the literature referred to in the text should be included. In duly justified cases, it is possible to include appendices at the end of the text.
Insofar as is possible, footnotes (numbered sequentially in subscript) should be avoided, and endnotes should never be used. The tables, numbered sequentially with Roman numerals and their respective captions, should be included in the text approximately where they should appear in the published text. However, images (plans, diagrams, illustrations, photographs, etc.) should only be indicated with a reference for each figure in the original text (e.g. Photograph 1), clearly highlighted using a different letter colour, at the approximate point where they are to appear in the published text. Each illustration should be printed on a separate sheet, including its reference number and corresponding caption, in the article’s language and, if it is not the language of the article, in English. Only figures of a suitable quality for publication will be accepted, both in terms of the resolution used (600 ppi as a guide), the size of the image (the edit box has a width of 70 or 150 mm, depending on whether one or two columns are used) and any additional processing required (graphic scale, numbering of elements, sections of drawn parts, keys for plans, etc.). For the electronic version, a minimum resolution of 600 ppi should be used in EPS, TIFF or JPG format. If there is sufficient budget, reproducing colour images may be considered, although this will always depend on the possibility of reorganising the layout of these images.
Bibliographic references or citations within the text will include the first surname (or both, hyphenated) of the author/authors (the first name initial is only included if there may be confusion between different authors) and the year of publication, separated by a comma (Elosegui, 1950) or (Elosegui-Irazusta, 1950). If there are several entries for the same author and year, a lowercase letter will be added to the references in the text and the bibliographic list (e.g. 1972a, 2006c, etc.). If there are two authors, both will be specified and the year of publication (Elosegui and Laborde, 1951). When there are three authors or more, the reference can be written by including the surname of the first signatory and the “et al.” formula (Elosegui et al., 1951).
The bibliography will be included as the final section of the text, and will not be numbered. For each author or group of authors, the papers cited will follow the same order as their date of publication, and include the following information: title of the paper, title of the journal, volume and pages. If it is a monograph instead of a journal article, it should be followed by the publisher and the city of publication. If it is a chapter from a collective work, this should also be cited, combining the above criteria. For example:
Lewis-Williams, D., 2002. The Mind in the Cave. Thames & Hudson, London.
Maroto, J., 2014. Localities of Reclau. In: Carbonell, E., Bermúdez de Castro, J.M., Arsuaga, J.L. (Coors.), Pleistocene and Holocene Hunter-Gatherers in Iberia and the Gibraltar Strait: the current archaeological record, 246-255. Universidad de Burgos, Burgos.
Utrilla, P., Baldellou, V., Bea, M., Montes, L., Domingo, R., 2014. La Fuente del Trucho. Ocupación, estilo y cronología. In: Corchón, S., Menéndez, M. (Eds.), Actas del coloquio Cien años de arte rupestre paleolítico. Centenario del descubrimiento de la cueva de la Peña de Candamo (1914-2014), 119-132, Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca.
Velasco-Vázquez, J., Esparza, A., 2016. Muertes ritualizadas en la Edad del Bronce de la Península Ibérica: un enterramiento inusual en Los Rompizales (Quintanadueñas, Burgos). Munibe Antropologia-Arkeologia 67, 75-106.
Article in a special issue of a journal Fontes, L.M., Straus, L.G., González-Morales, M.R., 2016. Lithic raw material conveyance and hunter-gatherer mobility during the Lowwer Magdalenian in Cantabria, Spain. In: Cacho, C., Iakovleva, L. (Guest Eds.), Landscape Analysis in the European Upper Palaeolithic. Reconstruction of the economic and social activities. Quaternary International 412 (A), 66-81.
Evaluation of originals
When an article has been received and its respective acknowledgement of receipt has been signed, the manuscript will undergo an initial formal evaluation. The journal’s editorial staff requires all bibliographic citations to be carefully checked to ensure that they are an exact match for the list at the end of the text (all literature referred to in the text must be listed at the end of the manuscript and all papers included in the bibliography section must be mentioned at least once in the original). In order, the quality of the writing and the style and spelling of the text, with which due care must be taken, will also be formally assessed. The editorial staff will be formally authorised to delete any citations when it is required to perform this check itself and it considers the number of mistakes to be excessive. Additionally, articles can be rejected if they exceed the maximum number of words permitted by our rules (7.500) or if they fail to follow the formal structure of an academic article. All of the above points will also be checked to ensure maximum formal compliance with all of the journal’s rules, before the manuscript is sent to be evaluated. A repeated failure to comply with the journal’s rules will be sufficient grounds to finally reject the original, without sending it to be evaluated by peers.
The journal has a rigorous external evaluation system. Once the original has been received in accordance with the formal specifications indicated below, the journal’s Chief Editor will propose a guest Editor to be responsible for its evaluation. The guest Editor will prepare the original for external review using the double-blind system, removing any reference to the author(s) from the manuscript and replacing their own bibliographic references with the expression SELF-CITATION in the citations and removing complete references from the bibliography In turn, the guest Editor will appoint between two and four reviewers for each contribution and their anonymous, reasoned reports (respecting a pre-set format that all reviewers have been informed of with precise instructions for their completion) will be sent to the first signatory (or the respective author) of the manuscript so that the necessary changes can be made to it. The communication will contain a rating of “Accepted as is”, “Accepted with minor changes”, “Accepted with major changes” or “Rejected”, and it will always be duly justified in the corresponding external reports. The whole process will respect the strictest anonymity of all parties involved. The authors undertake to meet any deadlines agreed with the editorial team of the journal concerning any changes that are to be made. The authors may correct the first print draft of the article, as long as they meet the deadlines set by the Editorial Board. Whenever possible, communication will be by email, to speed up the process as much as possible. Both the date of receipt of the original and that of its final acceptance will be stated in the header of the published text. Munibe Antropologia-Arkeologia will send the final electronic texts (PDF) of his/her article to the first signatory of the contribution, as well as a copy of the complete journal when this has been requested. The journal Munibe Antropologia-Arkeologia places special importance on strictly maintaining the frequency of the journal.
Ethical guidelines for journal publication
The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It 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 and the society of society-owned or sponsored journals.
An important role of the publisher is to support the extensive efforts of journal editors, and the often unsung volunteer work undertaken by peer reviewers in maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record. It is a tribute to scholarly practice that the system works well and problems are comparatively rare. The publisher has a supporting, investing and nurturing role in the scholarly communication process and is also ultimately responsible for ensuring that best practices are followed.
We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, the Society of Sciences Aranzadi will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful to editors. Finally, we are working closely with other publishers and industry associations to set standards for best practices on ethical matters, errors and retractions – and are prepared to provide specialized legal review and counsel if necessary.
Duties of authors
- 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 be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, 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. Publication of some kinds of articles (e.g. clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.
- 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 the 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 and have agreed to its submission for publication.
- Disclosure and conflicts of interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict 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.
Duties of editors
- Publication decisions
The main editor of this peer-reviewed journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working in conjunction with the relevant society (for society-owned or sponsored journals). The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The main editor may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers (or society officers) in making this decision.
- Fair play
An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
The main 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.
- Disclosure and conflicts of interest
- Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author.
- Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
- Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts 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.
- Editors 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.
- It should be ensured that the peer-review process for sponsored supplements is the same as that used for the main journal. Items in sponsored supplements should be accepted solely on the basis of academic merit and interest to readers and not be influenced by commercial considerations.
- Non-peer reviewed sections of their journal should be clearly identified.
- 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 behavior must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.
Duties of reviewers
- Contribution to editorial decisions
Peer review assists the main editor and guest editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. The Society of Sciences Aranzadi shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.
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 from the review process.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized 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
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. 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 papers.