Ethic policies

Ethics and good practices statement 

Good publishing practices comprise a set of fundamental guidelines that are required for any top-notch academic publication. These guidelines are known as the journal’s transparency principles, and they must guarantee adherence to the scientific communication standards as well as the rigorous resolution and management of ethical issues in line with open science practices. 

https://publicationethics.org/guidance/guideline/principles-transparency-and-best-practice-scholarly-publishing

For this reason, Sílex uses the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing by Committee on the Publication Ethics’ (COPE) along with other resources such as the Guía SciELO de Buenas Prácticas para el Fortalecimiento de la Ética en la Publicación Científica.

Sílex defines the following issues in research ethics.

• Plagiarism. Given the definition provided by COPE, plagiarism is “when someone presents the work of others (data, words, or theories) as their own without proper acknowledgement.” (COPE Council, n.d.) For this reason, Sílex has an anti-plagiarism policy and uses Turniting matching software.
• Image manipulation. When using images in their manuscripts, authors must ensure that they have the creator’s consent. Content appropriation occurs when an image is used without crediting the author. For more information, see the APA copyright guidelines 7th edition for images.
• Text recycling. Often mislabelled “self-plagiarism,” this practice involves the uncited reusing of passages or quotations from the author’s own work presented in a previous research paper submitted to a journal. As an exception, reusing phrases or sentences that do not exceed 20% of the previously published content in the version of the work that was submitted to the journal will be considered.
• Duplicate publication. If authors reuse the core ideas from one of their published works without major changes, the outcome is basically the same: a duplicate publication. It is likewise unethical to reuse the same core content by making minor edits (using synonyms, rearranging sentences, etc.) to deceive editors and readers into believing that the duplicate work is a new one.
• Duplicate submission. Duplicate or multiple submission occurs when a manuscript is submitted simultaneously to numerous journals. Authors should avoid submitting their manuscript to more than one journal.
• Data falsification and manipulation. The detection of data falsification or citation manipulation is deemed poor editing practice. The journal will use Turniting plagiarism detection tools to review this.
• Authorship dispute. Authorship should be discussed during research planning, agreed to in writing, and reviewed at several stages throughout the research process. In this instance, authors should explain the functions carried out and established by the CRediT taxonomy. The authors should decide together on the order and acknowledge all those who made a significant contribution to the project.
• Conflict of interest. Authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose any conflicts of interest (financial, professional, personal, etc.) that can compromise the impartiality of the evaluation and handling of the information provided. When there is a dispute, the journal will take the appropriate measures for each particular case. Similarly, authors must declare whether the research has funding sources at the time of submission

In order to prevent misconduct in academic research, Sílex outlines the obligations of each participant involved in the publication process to guarantee open practices and procedures.

Editor-in-Chief obligations

• As the journal’s official spokesperson, the editor-in-chief is responsible for publishing and directing the Editorial Board’s activities.
• They ensure the development and application of editorial policies and quality assurance in the journal’s management.
• They uphold scientific quality standards in compliance with indexing system criteria.
• They follow and monitor the editorial process’ stages. Must be informed of the work team’s actions to guarantee timely publishing.
• They chair the editorial team meetings, including meeting with associate editors, editorial board, and support staff
• They are responsible for granting final approval for manuscript evaluation and publication.
• They must guarantee impartial dialogue and confidentiality for all participants in the editorial process.

Associate, assistant, or guest editors obligations

• They and the editor-in-chief share responsibilities for the issue’s academic and scientific quality.
• Before peer review, they are responsible for conducting a preliminary review of manuscripts. They categorize and evaluate the relevance of manuscripts in relation to each section (article or essay), the research foundation, the abstract and keywords structure, the article’s presentation, and its internal coherence.
• Their recommendation to the editor-in-chief is their contribution to the manuscripts review process. They can indicate whether a manuscript should be accepted or rejected for review, but the editor-in-chief has the final decision.
• It is their obligation to address any ethical concerns raised by the manuscripts that the journal considers for publication.
• They are in charge of suggesting reviewers for manuscripts and assisting in the construction of a reviewer database.
• They must keep the evaluation confidentiality before and after the manuscript is reviewed and published.

Editorial team obligations

• They must keep the evaluation confidentiality before and after the manuscript is reviewed and published.
• They are responsible for providing editorial management advice to the editor-in-chief, the associate editors, and the institution in charge of the journal.
• They establish an editorial policy that complies with indexing system criteria to protect the journal’s scientific and technical quality.
• They propose the addition of new members of the Editorial Board and section editors from outside the publishing institution who are highly regarded in international academic and scientific settings.
• They attend meetings convened by the journal’s editor-in-chief, either in person or via videoconference.
• They assist the associate editors in selecting reviewers for pre-approved manuscripts.
• Every two years, the Editorial Board will be reviewed and renewed, and its members will have the choice to quit, be ratified, or be excluded.

Reviewers obligations

• They promise to do the review within the established time frame and will only accept manuscripts in which they have enough experience.
• In their review, they must be impartial and helpful, avoiding personal remarks that are disparaging or derogatory. They will consider each author on the basis of their qualifications, without discrimination based on race, religion, nationality, gender, seniority, or institutional affiliation
• They will preserve the confidentiality of the peer review process.
• They will submit detailed, well-founded, and reasoned review reports.
• They will adhere to the established review deadlines. If there are difficulties meeting deadlines, they will notify the journal and, if required, ask for an extension
• They must inform the journal’s editors of any significant similarities between the manuscript under review and any other previously published work.

Authors obligations

• Before submitting their manuscripts, authors must review the “Guidelines for preparing submissions” and formally adapt them in accordance with the “Publication guidelines for authors.”
• Manuscript proposals must exhibit high-quality, rigorous, original, and unpublished research. They must not have been submitted to another journal for parallel consideration or published before.
• Authors are responsible for the content submitted and published. They must review the content and ensure that they do not engage in editorial malpractice such as plagiarism, data falsification, citation manipulation, among others.
• If there are any relevant details regarding their submissions that should be considered, such as conflict of interest or if the research has received financing, authors are required to notify the editors.
• At the time of submission, authors must clearly indicate whether their work is a preprint and include a link (URL or DOI). Sílex accepts submissions of manuscripts that have been previously deposited as preprints on other open access servers as long as they had not been published in an academic journal or work with an ISBN.

Conflict of interest policy

Conflicts of interest may be personal, commercial, political, academic, or financial. They may arise when authors, reviewers, or editors have interests that could affect how manuscripts are prepared or reviewed. When submitting a manuscript, authors must recognise and declare any conflicts of interest that may have affected their work.

When reviewing a manuscript, which involves authors and reviewers, Sílex journal rigorously verifies the implementation of a policy to prevent the participation of individuals and institutions with personal, friendly, or adversarial relationships through its Editorial Board.

By ensuring the reliability of the analysis process for submitted material, this procedure aims to improve the credibility of the published articles. In this regard, authors and reviewers are requested to contact the journal’s Editorial Board if any of the following situations are found: a) personal and institutional ties and conflicts (partisan and familial) between reviewers and authors; b) financial support received for the development of the work that influences reading and could jeopardize the quality of the content produced. The author or authors must declare any possible conflicts of interest in a separate, signed document attached to the submission platform.

Anti-plagiarism and academic fraud policy

Academic fraud of any kind, including plagiarism and self-plagiarism, is strictly prohibited at Sílex. The following will not be permitted in manuscripts.

• Plagiarism or improper paraphrasing of ideas, data, or texts without giving due credit. COPE defines plagiarism “when someone presents the work of others (data, words, or theories) as their own without proper acknowledgement” (COPE Council, n.d.)
• Reusing fragments or quotations from one’s own work that have previously been published in research before the manuscript is submitted for journal review is known as self-plagiarism. As an exception, reusing phrases or sentences that do not exceed 20% of the previously published content in the version of the work that was submitted to the journal will be considered as an exception.
• Fabrication, manipulation, or invention of unverifiable data and results.
• Unjustified research fragmentation (salami slicing).
• Deliberate omission of relevant information.
• Before being submitted for blind peer review, all manuscripts are examined using anti-plagiarism software (Turnitin). As long as it aligns with properly referenced citations, a maximum of 25% text overlap is allowed; the remaining 75% must be original and written by the author or authors.

The manuscript will be rejected right away and the author or authors will be formally notified if plagiarism, fraud, or misconduct is detected. The journal will adhere to the Committee on Publication Ethics’ (COPE) guidelines, which include retracting the article and publishing an explanation note, if misbehaviour is discovered after publication.

Complaints and appeals policy

Sílex journal is committed to ensuring the integrity, impartiality, and transparency of its editorial processes. Sílex has the following process for receiving and addressing complaints, appeals, and suggestions in compliance with the international best practices advocated by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), whose values guide the journal’s editorial conduct. Although COPE provides a framework of ethical standards and best practices, the journal does not assign this group the task of resolving specific cases.

The following definitions are used for the purposes of this policy.

• Complaint. Any correspondence indicating a potential ethical violation, irregularity, or non-compliance with the journal’s editorial policies—whether related to authors, reviewers, editors, or the Editorial Board—is considered a complaint.
• Appeal. Any formal request for review of an editorial decision based on procedural or academic grounds, such as the rejection of a manuscript.
• Suggestion. Any recommendation or comment meant to enhance the journal’s editorial processes or quality without raising ethical concerns or challenging decisions.

Complaints, appeals, and suggestions should be sent to the journal’s institutional email address: revista.silex@uarm.pe. Clear, precise, and well-supported communications are essential. When appropriate, they should include documentation or evidence to support the claims made.

The editor-in-chief or, in the absence of that, the associate editor will determine if the communication is within the journal’s scope and if it is a complaint, appeal, or suggestion. In order to prevent conflicts of interest, a member of the editorial team who is directly involved in the complaint or appeal will not participate in the process; instead, another editor will take over.

After a thorough review, a final decision will be made. The required corrections or adjustments will be made if the complaint or appeal is upheld. Clear and reasoned explanations will be provided if the initial editorial decision is upheld. The final decision, together with a reasoned explanation of the decision and the actions taken, will also be communicated to the authors.

Following confirmation of receipt, the journal will endeavour to respond within a maximum of thirty (30) business days. When the complexity of the case requires a longer period, the person who submitted the complaint or appeal will be promptly notified of the extension and the status of the case.

The author may request Universidad Antonio Ruiz de Montoya’s Vice-Rector for Research to review their case if they believe their complaint or appeal has not been handled properly. This authority’s decision will be definitive and binding on the journal.

Errata, correction, and retraction policy

At Sílex journal, we are committed to upholding the integrity and quality of published research. Articles and other types of documents published in this journal will remain current, accurate, and unaltered to the extent possible. However, we recognize that exceptional circumstances may arise when an article is published and later needs to be corrected or rectified. Sílex editorial team will carefully evaluate such measures to make sure they are implemented with the highest assurances and in accordance with the guidelines suggested by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The following outlines our policies for corrections and retractions.

Erratas

An errata will be published when the journal makes a mistake or omission after publication that might affect the publication’s record, the authors’ or the journal’s reputation, but the article’s academic integrity remains intact.

A separate notification outlining the error and the modifications made to the document will be included in all erratas. In these circumstances, the article will be corrected and a note will be added at the end with a reference to the errata notice. In addition, the corrected version will be paginated and contain a DOI, and an errata notice will be published in a separate document linked to it.

Corrections

When significant mistakes or omissions by the authors are found that could compromise the interpretation of the results or conclusions, such as mistakes in the data or methodology, among other things, the authors’ or the journal’s scientific quality, or both, corrections will be made while maintaining the article’s academic integrity.

A separate notification outlining the error and the modifications made to the document will be included in all corrections. In these circumstances, the article will be corrected and a note will be added at the end with a reference to the correction notice. In addition, a correction notice will be published in a separate document linked to the corrected version, which will be a paginated text with a DOI.

Retractions

When a major mistake renders the article’s conclusions invalid, or when there has been serious research misconduct in a published manuscript (such as plagiarism, multiple publications, citation manipulation, fraudulent results, etc.) or publication misconduct, a retraction notice will be published. Authors may request the retraction of their articles if their reasons fit the criteria for retraction.

In such cases, the editorial team will conduct a thorough investigation into the retraction, which may include consulting with subject-matter experts and reviewing the article’s data and methodology. If it is found that the retraction is justified, the authors will be informed beforehand to proceed with the public notice on the platform, explaining the reasons for the retraction and providing a link to the publication. The retraction statement file will be paginated and assigned a DOI. The journal will follow the COPE retraction guidelines.