Ethical Standards and good editing practices
Divergencia has a series of ethical guidelines which outline the responsibilities and conducts which the editors, authors and peer reviewers should follow.
- When an article is sent to them, they acknowledge its receipt, guarantee an efficient process of review and inform the authors of the process which the article is undergoing in an opportune manner.
- The Editorial Team makes the final decision to accept or reject a manuscript, taking into account the recommendations derived from the evaluation process and the editorial review of the article, with reference to the criteria of quality, importance, relevance, originality and contribution to the discipline.
- It spots any conflict of interest between the authors and evaluators which may arise in the process of evaluating the article.
- It undertakes the search for evaluators, taking into account their academic career, knowledge and publications on the theme to be evaluated, and it guarantees their anonymity during the process of evaluation.
- It considers the use of peers proposed by an author, making sure that the opinion in question is objective. In addition, it does not use arbiters whom an author has asked it not to consult, unless it may guarantee the establishment of an impartial arbitration.
- When the editor is the author of a manuscript and wishes it to be submitted to evaluation, he or she must hand it over to another member of the Editorial Team so that that member may undertake the choice of arbiters.
- It respects the intellectual position and ideas expounded by the author in his or her manuscript.
- The editors may not use information from the articles received in any call for papers for the benefit of their own investigations.
- The Editorial Team should respond, in a diligent manner, to any request for retractions, corrections, complaints and clarifications, ensuring that there is a suitable investigation which leads to a quick solution of the problem.
- It is responsible for placing corrections and/or clarifications on the website of Divergencia when it recognizes a lack of accuracy or a mistake in a published content.
- It defines and continually reviews its editorial policies, so that Divergencia complies with standards which enable it to position itself as an academic publication with a national and international standing.
- It is responsible for the dissemination and distribution of the published contents among the authors, evaluators and entities with which it has exchange agreements, as well as national and international repositories and indexing systems, within the agreed on time limits.
- When Divergencia is interested in reproducing a previously published article, it commits itself to requesting the authorization of the author and publication where it first appeared.
- The articles submitted to Divergencia should be original and unpublished and must not simultaneously be in a process of evaluation by or have editorial commitments with another publication.
- The authors are the ones who are responsible for the ideas expressed in their article. In the author’s authorization of property rights, they must explicitly state that the text is of their authorship and in the same authorization that they respect the intellectual property rights of third parties.
- The authors of texts and multimedia files (photographies, audio and videos) that are accepted must authorize the Divergencia to use the author’s economic rights (reproduction, public communication, transformation and distribution), by signing the “Document of Authorization of Use of Intellectual Property Rights,” to include the contents in the Divergencia (electronic version). In the same document, the authors must confirm the fact that the materials are of their own authorship and that the intellectual property rights of third parties are respected in it.
- They must request the due authorizations for the use, reproduction and printing of the material which is not of their property/authorship (charts, graphics, maps, diagrams, photographs, etcetera.)
- When they use ideas which are not their own, they must acknowledge and give credit to their author and make a correct citation and reference, in accordance with the norms on Rights of the author. Otherwise, the author will be considered to have committed plagiarism.
- Divergencia may call the drafting of an article a fraud if it does not provide documentation which supports the ideas which are set forth and suppresses or alters the data which are presented.
- The author may commit an ethical fault when he or she submits a manuscript which has already been published by the author without citing the previous publication or showing new advances on the previously published material.
- When someone wishes to reproduce, translate or publish an article published in Divergencia, they must ask for an authorization by the Editorial Team.
- The author should not suggest evaluators with whom the author or authors has/have previously done collaborative studies.
- The authors should state their sources of funding and that there are no conflicts of interest.
- The authors should give credit to all those who participated in the study and those who have made significant contributions to the investigation should be regarded as co-authors. Likewise, authors who have not directly contributed to the drafting of the manuscript should not be included.
- The authors should ensure that the article does not contain personal criticisms of other academics. If criticisms of other studies are made, they must be clearly justified.
- In cases when the investigation involved the use of animals or humans, it is necessary to annex a declaration which indicates the experimental method, the informed consent for the experimentation with humans and the name of the institutions which approved the experiments.
- The Editorial Team will remit the article to the peer reviewer and a format which includes questions with carefully defined criteria which must be taken into account for the writing of the opinion.
- They must evaluate the article in an objective, neutral and impartial manner, indicating the aspects which need to be strengthened and without making personal criticisms in the review.
- In the case of personal or professional conflicts of interest, they should inform the editor, who will decide whether the evaluator should continue arbitrating the manuscript.
- The peer reviewers should support and clearly explain their doubts about the investigation they are assessing, so that the author will have a sufficient notion of the article’s faults and will be able to strengthen the article.
- They should inform the Editorial Team about any similarity between the article they are arbitrating and another which has already been published.
- The evaluator should not use the article submitted for his evaluation to benefit his or her own investigations or the work of third parties.
- In the evaluated article and the assessment sent to Divergencia, the peer reviewers should indicate parts where the manuscript has plagiarism or falsified data which compromise the work of other investigators.
The evaluators are responsible for suggesting that the article be accepted, rejected or approved with the modifications they suggest and should send their decision to Divergencia within the agreed on time limits.