Ethical guidelines for the publication of articles

Introduction

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed academic journal serves as a fundamental element for the development of a coherent and respected knowledge network of the academic community in their respective fields of research, where the impact of the work and research experience of their authors and also of the institutions that support them is embodied. For all these, and many other reasons, it is important to establish and clarify standards of ethical behavior expected by all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the reviewer and the publisher to which the journal belongs.

These ethical guidelines are designed to a greater extent for primary research journals, but they may also be relevant for other professional publications that make use of the dissemination of science, where the actors involved in the process are involved, but generally abide by discipline-specific standards or regulatory bodies, such as the International Council of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) [1] and the Consolidated Standards for Reporting Trials (CONSORT) [2] and the Committee on Publication Ethics (Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, COPE ). 

Ethical guidelines of the publisher

These guidelines have been written with all ethical requirements and guidelines in mind, but with special recognition that it is an important role of the publisher to support the efforts made by the editors of the Economic Review, and the often unacknowledged volunteer work done by reviewers, to maintain the integrity of the scholarly record. Although ethical codes inevitably focus on the infractions that sometimes occur, it is critical that the system works so well and that ethical and technical problems in papers, before and once published, are comparatively rare. The editorial of this journal is assumed by the Universidad Nacional de Loja, and as an institution of higher education, it has a role of support, investment, dissemination and encouragement in the scholarly communication process, but it is also ultimately responsible for ensuring that best practices are followed in its publications [3,4].

The Universidad Nacional de Loja as the main publisher of the Revista Económica, has adopted these policies and procedures to support editors, reviewers and authors in fulfilling their ethical duties according to these guidelines.

Copyrights

The Revista Económica is managed under an open access modality and makes use of a license called Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which promotes access and exchange of culture, and in general develops a set of free legal instruments that facilitate the use and sharing of both creativity and knowledge. However, in order for the Universidad Nacional de Loja as a publishing entity to publish and disseminate research articles, it needs publication rights. This is determined by a publishing agreement between the author and the publisher. This agreement deals with the transfer or license of copyright to the publisher and authors retain significant rights to use and share their own published articles. Authors should sign an exclusive license agreement, where authors have copyright, but grant exclusive rights to their article to the publisher.  The Universidad Nacional de Loja supports the need for authors to share, disseminate and maximize the impact of their research and these rights, in journals owned exclusively by the publisher, authors have the right to:

Share their article in the same manner allowed to third parties under the corresponding user license.
Retain patents, trademarks and other intellectual property rights (including research data).
Proper attribution and credit for published work.

Editor-in-Chief's Ethical Guidelines

Publication Decisions

The editor-in-chief of a scientific journal is solely responsible, independently, for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be accepted for review and subsequent publication if approved by the anonymous reviewers who are part of the article refereeing process. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers should always underpin such decisions. The editor-in-chief may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and by the legal requirements in effect at the time regarding issues such as libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor is free to consult with other editors or reviewers (or society officers) in making these decisions.

Peer Review

The Editor-in-Chief will ensure that the peer review process (Double blind peer review) is fair, impartial, and timely. Research articles should normally be reviewed by at least two external, independent reviewers and, when necessary, the Editor-in-Chief should seek additional opinions.

The Editor-in-Chief will select reviewers who have appropriate expertise in the relevant field and will follow best practices to avoid the selection of fraudulent reviewers.  The editor-in-chief will review all disclosures of potential conflicts of interest and self-citation suggestions made by reviewers to determine if there is any potential bias.

Fair play

The editor-in-chief should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnicity, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

The journal's editorial policies should encourage transparency and complete and honest reporting, and the editor-in-chief should ensure that anonymous reviewers and authors clearly understand what is expected of them. The Editor-in-Chief will use the journal's standard electronic submission system for all journal communications. The editor-in-chief will establish, together with the journal's editorial board, a transparent mechanism for appeals against editorial decisions.

Journal Metrics

The editor-in-chief should not attempt to influence the journal's ranking by artificially increasing any journal metric. In particular, the editor-in-chief shall not require the inclusion of references to articles in that (or any other) journal, except for genuinely scholarly reasons, and authors shall not be required to include references to the editor-in-chief's own articles or to products and services in which the editor-in-chief has an interest

Confidentiality

The Editor-in-Chief must protect the confidentiality of all material submitted to the journal and all communications with reviewers, unless otherwise agreed with the relevant authors and reviewers. In exceptional circumstances and in consultation with the editor, the editor may share limited information with editors of other journals when deemed necessary to investigate alleged research misconduct [5]. And, in addition, the editor must protect the identity of reviewers, through a process of anonymous (blind) review.

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript should not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or insights obtained through peer review should be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.

Conflicts of Interest

Any potential editorial conflicts of interest should be declared in writing to the editor prior to appointment and updated when new conflicts arise. The editor may publish such declarations in the journal.

The editor should not be involved in decisions about articles written by the editor himself or herself or by family members or colleagues or that concern products or services in which the editor has an interest. In addition, any such submission should be subject to all the usual journal procedures, peer review should be handled independently of the relevant author/editor and their research groups, and there should be a clear statement to this effect in any such paper that is published.

Oversight of published records

The publisher should work to safeguard the integrity of the published record by reviewing and assessing reported or suspected misconduct (research, publication, review and editorial), together with the editor (or society).

Such actions will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration to the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include other communications to relevant institutions and investigative bodies. The publisher will also make appropriate use of the publisher's systems for the detection of misconduct, such as plagiarism.

An editor presented with compelling evidence of misconduct should coordinate with the publisher (and/or society) to arrange for prompt correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other correction of the publication, as appropriate.

Ethical Guidelines for Reviewers

Contribution to editorial decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with the author, may also assist the author in improving the work. Anonymous peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and is one of the fundamental pillars of the scientific method. In addition to the specific ethics-related duties described below, reviewers are generally asked to treat authors and their work as they would like to be treated themselves and to observe good review etiquette.

Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research contained in a manuscript or who knows that prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and decline to participate in the review process.

Confidentiality

All manuscripts received for review should be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers should not share the review or information about the article with anyone or contact authors directly without permission from the editor.

Some editors encourage discussion with colleagues or joint review exercises, but reviewers should first discuss this with the editor-in-chief to ensure that confidentiality is respected and that participants receive proper credit.

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript should not be used in the reviewer's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or insights obtained through peer review should be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.

 Ethical issues for the reviewer

The reviewer should be alert to potential ethical issues in the article and bring them to the editor's attention, including any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and any other published article of which the reviewer has personal knowledge. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument has been previously reported must be accompanied by the appropriate citation.

Standards of objectivity and conflict of interest

Reviews should be conducted in an objective manner. Reviewers should be aware of any personal bias they may have and take it into account when reviewing a paper. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their opinions clearly with supporting arguments.

Reviewers should consult the Editor before agreeing to review a paper when they have potential conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions related to the papers.

If a reviewer suggests that an author include quotations from the reviewer's (or his/her associates') work, it should be for genuine scientific reasons and not with the intention of increasing the reviewer's citation count or enhancing the visibility of his/her (or his/her associates') work.

Ethical guidelines for 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. The underlying data should be accurately represented in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to enable others to reproduce the work. Fraudulent or deliberately inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Professional review and publication articles should also be accurate and factual, and editorial "opinion" papers should be clearly identified as such.

Data Access and Retention

Authors may be asked to provide the research data supporting their work for editorial review and/or to comply with the journal's open data requirements. Authors should be willing to provide public access to such data, if feasible, and should be willing to retain them for a reasonable number of years after publication.

External repository policy

The Revista Económica allows all versions: Submitted version (Submitted version)

Accepted Version (Author Accepted Manuscript) and Published Version (Version of Record) to be deposited in an institutional or other repository of the author's choice without restriction.

Originality and acknowledgement of sources

Authors should ensure that they have written entirely original work and, if authors have used the work and/or words of others, the reviewer should ensure that appropriate citation and permission has been obtained

Proper acknowledgement should always be given to the work of others. Authors should cite publications that have influenced the reported work and that give the work appropriate context within the broader scholarly record. In extreme cases, information obtained in private, such as in conversation, correspondence or discussion with others, should not be used or communicated without the explicit written permission of the source.

Plagiarism takes many forms, from "passing off the work of another as the author's own work, to copying or paraphrasing substantial portions of another's work (without attribution), to claiming results of research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical behavior and is unacceptable.

Multiple, redundant or simultaneous publication

In general, an author should not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one primary journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously constitutes unethical behavior and is unacceptable.

In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a paper that has been previously published, except in abstract form or as part of a published academic conference or thesis or as an electronic preprint.

Publication of some types 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 in question must agree to the secondary publication, which should reflect the same data and interpretation as the primary paper. The primary reference should be cited in the secondary publication.

Authorship of the paper

Authorship should be limited to those who have contributed significantly to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made substantial contributions should be listed as co-authors.

If there are others who have been involved in certain substantive aspects of the work (e.g., language editing or medical writing), they should be acknowledged in the acknowledgments section.

The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate coauthors are included in the paper and that inappropriate coauthors are not included, and that all coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Authors are expected to carefully consider the list and order of authors before submitting their manuscript and to provide the final list of authors at the time of original submission. Only in exceptional circumstances will the Editor consider (at his/her discretion) the addition, deletion or rearrangement of authors after the manuscript has been submitted and the author should clearly mark any such request to the Editor. All authors must agree to any such addition, deletion or rearrangement.

Authors assume collective responsibility for the work. Each author is responsible for ensuring that questions regarding the accuracy or completeness of any part of the work are properly investigated and resolved.

Hazards and human/animal subjects

If the work involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment that present unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify them in the manuscript.

If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and have been approved by the appropriate institutional committees. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for human subject experimentation. The privacy rights of human subjects should always be respected.

In the case of human subjects, the author must ensure that the work described has been conducted in accordance with the World Medical Association Code of Ethics (Declaration of Helsinki) for human experiments [6]. All animal experiments must comply with the ARRIVE guidelines [7] and must be conducted in accordance with the UK Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 and related guidelines [8], or the EU Directive 2010/63/EU on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes [9], or the US Public Health Service Policy on the Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals and, as appropriate, the Animal Welfare Act [10].

Appropriate consents, permissions, and releases should be obtained when an author wishes to include case details or other personal information or images any individual in a publication. Written consents should be retained by the author and copies of consents or evidence that such consents have been obtained should be provided to the journal upon request.

Conflicts of Interest

All authors must disclose in their manuscript any financial and personal relationships with other persons or organizations that could be considered to inappropriately influence (bias) their work.

All sources of financial support for the conduct of the research and/or preparation of the article should be disclosed, as well as the role of the sponsor(s), if any, in the design of the study; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of the data; in the writing of the report; and in the decision to submit the article for publication. If the funding source(s) has no such involvement, then this should be declared.

Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest possible stage.

Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a major error or inaccuracy in his or her own published work, he or she has an obligation to notify the editor or publisher of the journal without delay and to cooperate with the editor or publisher in retracting or correcting the article if the editor or publisher deems it necessary. If the editor or publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains an error, the author has an obligation to cooperate with the publisher, including providing evidence upon request.

Integrity of figures and images

It is not acceptable to enhance, darken, move, remove, or introduce a specific feature within an image [11]. Adjustments to brightness, contrast, or color balance are acceptable as long as they do not obscure or remove any information present in the original. Manipulation of images to improve clarity is acceptable, but manipulation for other purposes could be considered scientific ethical abuse and will be dealt with accordingly [18].

Authors should comply with any specific policy on graphic images applied by the journal concerned, e.g., by providing the original images as supplementary material with the article, or by depositing them in an appropriate repository.

 

References

[1] ICMJE Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals http://www.icmie.org/

[2] CONSORT Guidelines for Randomized Trials

[3] The STM trade Association International Ethical Principles for Scholarly Publication http://www.stm-assoc.org/201a o21 STM Ethical Principles for Scholarly Publication.pdf

[4] COPE Codes of Conduct

[5] The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Guidelines on editors-in-chief

http://publicationethics.org/files/Sharing%20 of Information between the EiCs guidelines web version o.pd

[6] World Medical Association (WMA) Declaration of Helsinki for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki-ethical-principles-for-medical-research- Involving

[7] Animal Research: Guidelines for Reporting of In Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE) https://www.ncars.org.uk/arrive-guidelines

[8] the UK Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/svstem/uploads/attachment data/file/aoS^Qa/ConsolidatedASPAil an20ia.pdf

[9] EU Directive 2010/63/EU on animal experiments http://ec.europa.eu/environment/chemicals/lab animals/legislation en.htm

[10] U.S. Public Health Service Policy on the Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals https://grants.nih.gov/gra nts/olaw/references/phspol icvlabanimals.pdf

[11] Rossner and Yamada, 2004. The Journal of Cell Biology, 166,11-15. http://icb.rupress.0rg/content/166/1/11.full