Code of ethics
Revista Saberes Educativos is governed by ethical standards inspired by COPE
(Committee of Publication Ethics).
This Code of Ethics applies to all the stages of the publication process, being extensive
to authors
, reviewers, editors and the Editorial Board of the journal.
Procedure in cases of scientific fraud
The journal understands as scientific fraud the following situations:
§
Plagiarism, which is considered to occur when authors give as their own ideas
previou
sly raised by another, without properly recognizing the authorship of the
third.
§
Self
-
plagiarism, which is considered to occur when authors reuse, totally or
partially, a work of their own that has already been published, presenting it as
new or original,
without reference to the previous work
1
.
§
Falsification
or fabrication of data.
§
Obvious omission of key data.
1
Extracted
from the article
“Ética editorial y
el problema del autoplagio”,
written
by
Ernesto Spinak,
published by
SciElo en Perspectiva
.
Retrieved from
https://blog.scielo.org/es/2013
/11/11/etica
-
editorial
-
y
-
el
-
problema
-
del
-
autoplagio/#.Wylsn1ZKib8
§
Duplicate, redundant or simultaneous publication, which is considered to occur
when authors write about their own research or work in two or more
articles,
considering different perspectives, angles or aspects, without quoting the
original. This phenomenon is al
so known as "text recycling"
2
.
§
Relevant conflicts of interest that have not been reported.
If plagiarism is detected, the article will be r
ejected immediately and the responsible
author will not be allowed to publish in the journal for a period of three years, starting
from the date of notification. In parallel, the editors would have to contact both the
plagiarist and the plagiarized work au
thor, indicating to the latter the identity of the
first. In certain cases, it may be necessary to inform the institutions to which both
authors are affiliated.
Responsibilities of the editors:
-
Criteria for publication:
Editors will select qualified r
eviewers to ensure a well
-
informed and critical assessment of the subjects covered in the manuscripts. Editors
will select at least two reviewers for each accepted article, seeking to guarantee the
objectivity of the review process. Based on the reports re
ceived from the reviewers,
editors will decide whether or not to publish the analyzed paper.
-
Confidentiality:
The editors undertake to keep strict confidentiality about the
articles received for publication. They may not disclose information about them
to
third parties, unless they are reviewers (current or potential), editorial advisors or
2
Extracted
from the article
“Ética editorial y el problema del autoplagio”,
written
by
Ernesto Spinak,
published by
SciElo en Perspectiva
.
Retrieved from
https://blog.scielo.org/es/2013/11/11/etica
-
editorial
-
y
-
el
-
problema
-
del
-
autoplagio/#.Wylsn1ZKib8
editors. Likewise, confidentiality will be kept about the identity of authors and
reviewers throughout the evaluation process of the articles, according to the double
blind model.
-
Impartiality and non
-
discrimination:
Editors will analyze articles that qualify for
the peer review process considering, exclusively, their academic and scientific merit.
Acceptance or rejection of articles will be completely independent o
f any type of
discrimination or affirmative action, be it for reasons of gender, sexual orientation,
ethnicity, nationality, religion, political ideology, institutional affiliation or any other.
-
Conflicts of interest:
Editors undertake not to use conten
t that has been sent for
evaluation, unless they obtain the author’s written consent. Editors must refrain from
making decisions regarding manuscripts that represent or involve conflicts of interest
for themselves, whether that conflict is raised by the co
ntent treated, the responsible
authors, their institution of origin, etc. Conflicts of interest can occur in both positive
and negative terms (associativity, rivalry, competition, etc.). The editors may invoke
this clause, thus abstaining from the decision
-
making process regarding an article, and
should promptly inform this to the rest of the
editors
.
-
Punctuality:
Editors take responsability for ensuring that the acceptance, review
and publication of the manuscripts are completed in time in order to meet
the set
deadlines. It is their duty to ensure the smooth running of the journal and they must
be firmly committed to respect the agreed deadlines.
Responsibilities of reviewers:
-
Confidentiality:
Reviewers
undertake
to
treat
all
papers
as
confidentia
l
material.
Therefore,
its
content
can
not
be
discussed
or
shared
with
third
parties,
by
any
means.
Likewise,
their
reviews
must
also
be
considered
confidential
and
may
not
be
disseminated
or
shared
with
third
parties.
-
Punctuality:
Reviewers
commit
them
selves
to
respect
stipulated
deadlines,
being
aware
their
work
is
fundamental
for
the
correct
fulfillment
of
the
entire
publication
process.
Likewise,
in
case
of
not
having
sufficient
knowledge
about
a
topic
or
believing
they
will
not
be
able
to
review
a
m
anuscript
in
time,
they
must
inform
the
editors
as
soon
as
possible,
rejecting
the
assigned
revision.
-
Collaboration
and
assistance
for
the
editorial
decision:
Reviewers
undertake
to
review
manuscripts
with
a
critical
spirit,
prolixity
and
honesty,
guara
nteeing
the
scientific
and
literary
quality
of
the
manuscripts.
They
must
be
aware
their
evaluations
are
fundamental
for
the
editors
and
the
decision
making
process.
-
Objectivity:
Reviewers
will
submit
an
evaluation
report
according
to
the
guidelines
gra
nted
by
the
journal.
Criticism
of
the
work
must
be
carried
out
in
an
impartial
manner
and
the
opinions
expressed
should
be
based
on
reasonable
and
solid
arguments.
Any
personal
judgment
about
the
authors
will
be
considered
improper
and
inopportune,
calling
into
question
the
suitability
of
the
reviewer.
It
is
a
fundamental
part
of
the
reviewers
commitment
to
alert
the
editors
in
case
a
manuscript
or
part
of
it
has
been
published
or
is
in
the
review
process
in
another
journal.
-
Use
of
sources:
Reviewers
und
ertake
to
indicate
pertinent
and
relevant
bibliographical
references
that
have
been
omitted
or
forgotten
by
the
author.
Likewise,
reviewers
undertake
to
inform
the
editors
if
there
is
an
overlap
or
a
considerable
resemblance
between
the
manuscript
and
othe
r
articles
already
published.
-
Conflicts of interest:
Like editors, reviewers undertake not to use content that has
been sent for evaluation, unless they obtain the author's written consent. Reviewers
should refrain from evaluating work that represents o
r involves conflicts of interest.
Likewise, in case of recognizing the authorship of an article, reviewers must inform
the editors in a timely manner and refrain from carrying out the review.
Responsibilities of authors:
-
Simultaneous,
repetitive,
redu
ndant
publications:
Authors
must
commit
them
self
not
to
send
the
same
contribution
to
different
journals
simultaneously,
even
if
the
article
is
not
written
in
the
exactly
same
way.
Nor
should
they
attempt
to
publish
the
same
subject
or
the
same
paper
on
m
ore
than
one
occasion,
repeating
or
duplicating
the
findings
and/or
content.
Both
sending
the
same
article
to
different
journals
and
presenting
the
same
content
in
more
than
one
publication
are ethically reproachable
and will cause the immediate rejection
of the article.
-
Authenticity, plagiarism and self
-
plagiarism:
By sending their manuscripts,
authors attest that the information and data contained in their work are true and that
the results of their research have not been manipulated in order to valida
te the
starting hypothesis. Likewise, they guarantee their works do not contain fragments of
articles written by other author, unless this is duly indicated. Finally, they certify their
manuscripts do not contain fragments of articles of their own authorsh
ip previosly
published, unless this is duly indicated. Both plagiarism and self
-
plagiarism are
ethically reproachable and will cause the immediate rejection of any article. It is
recommended that authors submit their papers to anti
-
plagiarism programs befo
re
sending them for publication.
-
Authorship:
Only
people
who
have
contributed
significantly
to
the
design,
planning,
conceptualization
and/or
execution
of
the
paper
can
be
considered
as
authors
of
it.
The
main
author
has
the
duty
to
include
as
co
-
author
s
all
those
who
have
had
a
significant
role
in
the
development
of
the
article.
Likewise,
the
main
author
undertakes
not
to
include
those
who
have
not
been
essential
in
the
process.
In
any
case,
people
who
have
collaborated
with
the
development
of
the
artic
le
can
be
mentioned
as
collaborators
or
contributors.
The
main
author
guarantees
that
other
authors
have
been
ranked
based
on
their
contribution
to
the
article,
as
well
as
certifies
that
all
co
-
authors
have
reviewed
and
approved
the
version
of
the
paper
th
at
has
been
sent
for
publication.
-
Bibliographical
references
and
other
sources:
All
bibliographical
references
must
be
duly
cited
in
the
main
text
and
later
detailed
in
the
corresponding
final
section
(list
of
reference),
identifying
the
author
and
the
document
that
has
served
as
a
reference.
Authors
must
always
correctly
indicate
all
the
contributions,
sources
and
references
that
have
allowed
to
give
body
and
substance
to
the
article.
-
Conflicts of interest:
Authors must guarantee there are no conflic
ts of interest that
may condition the obtained interpretations or results. When there are conflicts of
interest, authors must reveal it explicitly in the manuscript, warning readers so that
they can form their own opinion about this.
-
Errors in published
works:
if authors identify errors or relevant inaccuracies in
their manuscripts, they should give immediate notice to editors and collaborate in
order to correct them.
-
Acknowledgement
of funding:
when a work or project has received funding, this
must b
e explicitly mentioned in the document, indicating the source of funding.
-
Research methodology:
Articles related to a research must include information in
detail so other researchers can replicate the research. Authors must specify the ethical
standards
that have governed the research and the treatment received by the
participants. Authors must safeguard the identity of the participants.
-
Responsibility:
Authors guarantee they have reviewed the most relevant and
current scientific literature regarding
the topics studied. They also state they have
taken into account various theoretical approaches that are relevant to their work,
ensuring they have taken them into account in a plural and responsible manner.
