Ethical Policies

Research ethics 

The Editorial Board is responsible for blocking the publication of research which does not meet the ethical criteria presented below. The journal Desde el Sur adheres to the recommendations contained in the Code of Conduct for Journal Editors (COPE http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines).

In the event that research submitted is conducted on human beings, it must be expressly stated that the procedures involved were carried out with respect for the ethical guidelines contained in the Helsinki Declaration; in the event that research submitted was conducted on animals, use is recommended of the guidelines for the care and use of laboratory animals issued by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (https://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/guide-for-the-care-and-use-of-laboratory-animals.pdf). Also, it must be indicated that the study was approved by an Ethics Committee.

Publishing ethics

              In accordance with the recommendations of COPE:

  • Research must have been conducted in an ethical and responsible manner.
  • Research must be presented in a clear, transparent manner, without fabrication, falsification or manipulation of data.
  • Methods must be presented in a clear manner, without ambiguities, in order to ensure that the findings can be confirmed by others (in the case of research studies).
  • Research must be original, free of plagiarism, and must not have been published previously in another publication. Also, the publication of the same research in more than one journal is prohibited.
  • Authors shall assume collective responsibility for the entire content of their publication and will be obliged to offer retractions or the correction of errors wherever required.
  • All authors listed must have made significant contributions to the research. Credited authorship should reflect the contribution of each of the work’s coauthors, avoiding ethical errors such as honorary, gift or ghost authorship.
  • Information concerning sources of financing must be provided clearly and transparently. Furthermore, any potential conflicts of interest must be described clearly.
  • The list of references must be provided by the author(s).

The responsibilities of the author(s)

In addition to the indications set out in the previous section «Publishing ethics», cited authorship should accurately reflect the contribution made by each author at the time the research was conducted and the text written. Where it is considered that authorship should correspond only to those who made a substantial contribution to the work and not to those who engaged in other «minor» activities (purely technical, revising of texts, etc.), this agreement should be established at the beginning of the research project. The journal encourages the application of adequate authorship criteria; however, at no time will it assume the role of judge in the face of authorship disputes. It is up to the authors to arrive at a final decision.

Honorary authorship is defined as any individual who does not meet the criteria for authorship but who is included by virtue of their reputation, influence or seniority; gifted authorship is that which does not meet the criteria of authorship but which is included as a favor or in return for payment; ghost authorship is that which does meet the criteria of authorship but which is not included in the list of authors.

Responsibilities of the advisory committee

- To supervise the content and development of the journal in coordination with the editorial committee.

- To provide suggestions for improvements to the journal and advise the journal’s editor, in order to optimize editorial processes. 

Responsibilities of the editorial committee, director, and associate editors

- The characteristics of texts deemed suitable for publication and descriptions of the peer review processes are made publically available by the editorial committee. Furthermore, this body is available for the resolution of any dispute which may arise.

- The decision of the editorial committee to accept or reject a text is based upon objective criteria, without distinction of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious, political or ideological beliefs.

- The editorial committee, before submitting them to peer review, conducts an analysis of the similitude of the documents received (as indicated in the anti-plagiarism policy which forms part of the Journal Policies and Guidelines) in order to identify and prevent the publication of texts where research misconduct has occurred. Under no circumstances will the director or editors encourage misconduct or allow misconduct to occur.

- The editorial committee may not divulge the information contained in manuscripts to any person other than the author of the work.

- The editorial committee may not use unpublished material contained in manuscripts for personal research.

- In the event that the editorial committee receives any complaint regarding research misconduct, the director or the editors must process any such complaint correctly, through an exhaustive investigation of the affair, and if such responsibility is determined, they shall publish the corresponding corrections or retractions in the journal, naming those authors implicated in the misconduct.

- The director and editorial committee are responsible for what is published in the journal. If a case warrants it, they may publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and/or apologies.

- The director undertakes to ensure the confidentiality of all processes and their execution in accordance with the ethical criteria established by COPE.

Guidelines for the retraction or correction of texts where ethical problems have been observed

In the event that malpractices which contravene the ethical guidelines of the journal are reported, suspected or discovered, the following procedure will be adopted:

  1. The director of the journal will designate one of the journal’s editors to corroborate the accusations through an internal investigation, in order to gather as much evidence as possible. This investigation must be conducted within a maximum period of two weeks.
  2. In the event that malpractice on the part of an author or authors is confirmed, they will be sent a message within a maximum period of one week, to which the evidence of malpractice will be attached, indicating, in accordance with editorial guidelines, that the authors must issue a retraction, correction and apology. The communication from the authors must be issued within a maximum period of one week. Furthermore, in parallel, the director of the journal will publish the appropriate retractions, corrections, clarifications and apologies on the journal’s website.
  3. In the event that no malpractice on the part of the author(s) is corroborated, the director of the journal will publish the corresponding clarifications in order to clarify the issue.