Ethics and Best Practices
Ethics and Good Editorial Practices
Preliminary Consideration
Recognizing the need to specify the criteria and procedures that should govern the relationships between periodic scientific publications, their authors, and their reviewers, as well as to define the rights and responsibilities of each party involved in the process of participating in the public sphere, Revista Territorios y Regionalismos (RTR) hereby outlines its ethical framework and good practices. This framework is based on the guidelines proposed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in its Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors: http://publicationethics.org/
Duties and Responsibilities of Editors
General
- Ensure the quality of the material being published.
- Defend freedom of expression.
- Safeguard the integrity and confidentiality of academic records.
- Prevent commercial interests from compromising intellectual and editorial standards.
- Be prepared to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies when necessary
Specifics Regarding Readers
Whether through direct mention or specific requirements, the editorial team will always provide all information regarding the publication's origin, sources of funding, the role of potential financiers or sponsors, and the financial origins or sponsorships of the published articles. Additionally, they will make the information about editorial policy, editing criteria, and indexing categories publicly available.
In Relation to Authors
Editors will take all necessary steps to ensure the quality of the material they publish, specifying, if applicable, the purposes and standards of requirements for the different sections in which the content is organized.
The decisions of the journal regarding the acceptance or rejection of a proposal for publication will be based exclusively on the importance, originality, and clarity of the manuscript, as well as its relevance to the journal's orientation, as stated in 'Who We Are.'
On the journal's website, it will inform authors about manuscript preparation requirements, the original submission evaluation process, review guidelines, response deadlines, appeal mechanisms, copyright treatment, and conflict of interest resolution. Any changes in personnel and editorial direction of the journal will not affect authors (or their work) accepted for publication before the changes were made.
Regarding Peer Review
The journal will publish the guidelines or assessment criteria for original submissions, so authors will know what aspects reviewers will focus on in their work. RTR will take measures to ensure and protect the privacy of the identities of peer reviewers and those being evaluated, prior to publication, of course. Any changes in this regard will be promptly communicated to the authors.
In the event of an unresolved or unsatisfactory complaint from authors or reviewers regarding an action taken by the journal's editorial board, an impartial arbiter will be mutually agreed upon by the parties, and their decision will be final and unappealable."
In relation to promoting debate
The journal's editorial board will publish reasoned criticisms or objections received regarding the publication of an article or opinion. The authors of the criticized materials will, in turn, have the opportunity to respond, adhering to the norms of respect and academic courtesy.
With regard to commercial considerations
RTR is an open-access, free-to-access journal. It does not charge any fees for the publication and/or access to its content.
Duties and responsibilities of authors
Regarding authorship of the work
The individual listed as the corresponding author, in the case of multiple-authored works, must ensure the recognition of those who have contributed significantly to the conception, planning, design, execution, data acquisition, interpretation, and discussion of the article's results. Likewise, the corresponding author must ensure that those who sign the work have reviewed and approved the final version and give their consent for possible publication.
The corresponding author must ensure that none of the responsible authors of the work has been omitted, while at the same time, each of them meets the mentioned criteria for co-authorship, in order to avoid fictitious or gift authorship, as it constitutes an academic misconduct. For these purposes, the final authorship of the work will be fixed from the moment it is submitted for evaluation to the journal and cannot be modified later without a detailed and reasonable explanation justifying the addition or removal of an author, an explanation that the journal's editorial team may or may not accept.
Additionally, contributions from other collaborators who are not listed as authors or responsible for the final version of the work should be acknowledged in a note in the article, as a form of gratitude. If requested by the journal or the article's authors, the published version will briefly describe the individual contribution of each member of the signing group to the collective work.
The sources of information
Each article should acknowledge the publications that have influenced the research and argumentation process, identifying and citing the corresponding original sources in the references and bibliography. However, irrelevant citations for the work or references to similar examples should not be included, and there should not be an overuse of references to well-established research in the body of scientific knowledge. Authors should not use information obtained privately through conversations, correspondence, or from any discussions with colleagues in the field unless they have explicit, written permission from the source of information, and that information has been received in an academic advisory context.
Regarding ethical and academic integrity
The journal's editorial team will ensure that the published content adheres to internationally accepted ethical standards. Consequently, it expects that the materials proposed by the authors inherently possess ethical integrity. If necessary, authors will be asked to provide relevant ethical evidence, such as approvals from ethics committees or review boards of their affiliated institutions. The journal's editorial team reserves the right to determine the quality, relevance, or pertinence of the provided endorsements.
The journal will promote ethical integrity in both published and unpublished works. To achieve this, priority will be given to addressing concerns with the authors or those directly involved. In cases where ethical violations are of significant magnitude or implication, they may be referred to other individuals and institutions. If significant inaccuracies, misleading statements, or distorted information are discovered to have been published in the journal, RTR will request the authors to make immediate corrections in the online version of the publication. This procedure must be clearly explained within the same publication. If, for any reason, the required corrections cannot be made, the editors reserve the right to remove the content under discussion.
Funding sources
As indicated in the guidelines for authors, they should provide a footnote to inform whether the article was commissioned by an institution or received funding from a private or state entity. This is done to determine whether this situation may or may not affect the content of the article.
Accuracy and originality of the works
Authors must ensure that the data or results presented in the work are authentic, truthful, and original, and have not been copied, invented, distorted, or manipulated. Plagiarism in all its forms (including self-plagiarism), multiple or redundant publication, simultaneous submission of proposals to more than one journal, as well as the invention or manipulation of data, are serious ethical violations and are considered academic fraud.
However, it is acceptable to publish a work that expands upon another one previously published as a brief note, communication, conference paper, or working paper—though never in another peer-reviewed journal—provided that the text upon which it is based is appropriately cited and the modifications represent a substantial advancement over what was previously published. Secondary publications are also acceptable if they are targeted at entirely different readerships; for example, if there is a version for specialists as opposed to one aimed at the general public. These circumstances should be specified, and the original publication should be appropriately cited.
Plagiarism and self-plagiarism
The improper use of third-party resources or one's own work constitutes one of the most serious violations of ethics and integrity in research and academic publishing. There is an extensive body of literature on this issue, characterizing the problem in its various dimensions. RTR is concerned about this phenomenon and works on the detection of plagiarism and self-plagiarism through electronic means.
This entails reviewing and checking the titles of works, author names, and content on web search engines (Google; DDG). Specialized web tools such as Urkund, Turnitin, or Copyscape may also be employed. Additionally, the journal remains attentive to the advice and guidance from the University of Applied Sciences Berlin, HTW Berlin, one of the leading institutions in the study of this issue: http://plagiat.htw-berlin.de/start-en/ Presumptions of plagiarism or self-plagiarism and other forms of deceptive use of previous work will undergo the following steps:
- Assessment of suspicion or wrongdoing by the journal's editorial team
- Communication of doubt or concrete evidence of fraud to the author(s)
- Setting a deadline for explanations or clarifications. The deadline, barring exceptional circumstances, is strict and will not extend beyond 30 consecutive days from the moment of communication to the parties involved.
- Consideration, in relevant cases, of explanations and supporting evidence from questioned authors.
- Final resolution and verdict by the journal's editorial team regarding the ultimate fate of the work in question, within a maximum period of 60 days. The verdict will be final and not subject to appeal.
The entire procedure will be conducted in writing and will be properly documented in the journal's management records. If necessary, the publication's editorial team may seek the advice or opinions of external experts to arrive at a fair resolution.
Authors who have indeed committed plagiarism or self-plagiarism will face the penalty of being unable to submit new work to the journal for a period of three years. The journal reserves the right, depending on the nature and effects of the plagiarism in question, to make the results public or refer the matter to other relevant administrative and jurisdictional authorities. For the purpose of defining concepts and assessing the potential detection of this violation, RTR adheres to the recommendations stipulated by COPE and HTW Berlin.
Duties and Responsibilities of Reviewers
The reviewer commits to applying rational and impartial criteria in their reviews, avoiding, to the best of their ability, any bias in their assessment based on their opinions about the subject matter or the results presented.
- The reviewer may accept a review assignment if they believe they have the appropriate experience or knowledge in the subject matter and can provide their report by the requested deadline.
- The reviewer is obligated to handle the assigned work with the utmost confidentiality, with a complete prohibition on discussing the material with third parties.
- The reviewer should inform the editors if they have any conflicts of interest with the material under review or their perspective and should recuse themselves from reviewing if this conflict of interest is insurmountable.
- The reviewer may not make any use of the entrusted work until it has been made public, especially if such use intends to benefit or harm any individual or organization.
- The reviewer should reject the review if they have been involved in any of the stages of conception or development of the work under evaluation.
- The reviewer should notify the editors if they detect any ethical irregularities, such as clear similarities to previously published work or the presence of improbable data.
- The reviewer should bear in mind that peer review is a reciprocal effort within the academic community that aims to be fair to the efforts made by each researcher in the pursuit or dissemination of new knowledge."
