Ethical Policies

 

Contents

Ethical Policies of Universidad del Rosario Journals

Use License and Author’s Rights

Authors grant journals the right to be the first to publish their works and are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommerical-ShareAlike License (CC BY-NC-SA), which allows others to share the work if they include an acknowledgment of authorship of the work and the first publication of the work by the journal.

creative commons license

Copyright

Articles submitted to the journals of Universidad del Rosario must be original and unpublished. They must not have been submitted simultaneously to other journals, compilations, or any other publication media, even if they were published in institutional repositories. The economic rights will belong to the Universidad del Rosario and the moral rights will remain with the author, as per the Intellectual Property Policy of Universidad del Rosario 1. If authors wish to submit their articles to other publications, they must request the Editorial Universidad del Rosario for the corresponding authorizations. Similarly, if journals are interested in publishing articles that have been published previously in other media, they must seek permission from the copyright owners of the work.

Authors’ Responsibilities

Authors must submit their articles and book reviews to the journals through the Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform. To do so, they must access the link of each publication and follow the instructions: http://revistas.urosario.edu.co/.

Authors must send unpublished articles or book reviews, together with a letter of authorization for publication attached, stating that their work is original; that no other journal has published it; that it respects third parties’ intellectual property rights; and that they have due permission for the use of graphics, tables, photographs, diagrams, etc. Authors must sign and send the authorization letter to journals, as required. The sole responsibility of the article’s quality, research rigor, and ideas expressed lies with the author(s). The authors accept double-blind peer review of their article by national or international academic peers, that is, they will not know who the evaluators of the article are, and vice versa. The authors also undertake to incorporate the modifications suggested by the evaluators and share the draft before the deadlines set by the journals. In cases where authors do not consider reviewers’ suggestions, they must send a letter explaining the main reasons for their choice. In any case, journals will make the final decision regarding the publication of articles once the evaluation process has been completed. Journals will inform authors whether the article has been approved, approved with modifications, or rejected. They may also request authors to revise their article and submit a new version. The text will be submitted for further peer review in the latter case. After receiving the final version of the document, journals will make the final decision on its publication; at that moment, authors will be informed of the document’s approval and its estimated publication date.

Journals will contact the evaluators of an article if the article meets the essential conditions and criteria required for evaluation as per the editorial team’s opinion. If the article does not meet these requirements, journals will inform authors of the reasons for not moving forward with the evaluation. After the initial review (and if the texts meet the required conditions), the editorial team will define the articles that will be submitted to the arbitration process. At this point, suitable individuals will be contacted to conduct the evaluation. The result will be sent to the authors as soon as possible. If the process takes longer than usual, the editor will contact the authors to inform them of the circumstances.

About the Evaluators

The peer reviewers selected by the journals may be external to Universidad del Rosario and may be Colombians or foreigners. Each article that has passed through the initial filter of the editorial team will be evaluated by at least two external academic peers. They will be persons with no conflict of interest with respect to the authors and their work. If there is any doubt in this regard, another evaluator will be sought. Reviewers will be responsible for informing the journal if they have any conflicts of interest with regard to the article. Reviewers will evaluate the article in terms of its thematic relevance, theoretical and methodological quality, and the significance of its findings. The reviewers may suggest changes in the articles in relation to substantive (i.e., theoretical, methodological, and thematic) and formal (i.e., spelling and typography) elements. While sharing their opinion, they follow the guidelines of the journal’s evaluation format. This format includes a series of rigorously selected criteria. Evaluators may approve, approve with modifications, request revisions suggesting a resubmission for another round of reviews, or reject articles for publication.

Editorial Responsibilities

The editorial team of each journal is responsible for its editorial policies and publication standards and for meeting them in each issue. They are responsible for publishing, if necessary, errata, clarifications, and corrections in the digital version of journals. The editorial team is responsible for processing articles submitted to journals and maintaining confidentiality during the peer-review process until publication, withdrawal, or rejection. To ensure transparency in the evaluation and publication processes, editors and editorial board members will not publish articles in journals, except for the editorial, which is a presentation article that the editor or board members may prepare. When an issue is published, journal editors are responsible for disseminating and distributing the issue among the persons and institutions with which they have an exchange commitment and with the authors and evaluators of the articles.

Plagiarism prevention policy

Articles submitted for review must be original and unpublished. The editorial team will review the originality of all articles submitted to the journal through different means; the Turnitin tool is used for the evaluation of similarity and reference verification. By submitting an article for review, the authors accept that the document will be examined to prevent plagiarism and promote ethical policies in publication.

Journals adhere to the policies of the Committee on Publication Ethics - COPE (JM12058) to maintain transparency and good practices, prevent inappropriate conduct in the publication of articles, and promote high quality academic production. If there are doubts of plagiarism, we will proceed in accordance with these policies.

Good Practices Guidelines

Universidad del Rosario, as a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), has adopted the principles of transparency and good practices of scientific publications proposed by COPE, as follows:

  1. Peer-review process: The Universidad del Rosario journals shall implement a double-blind review procedure by a group of expert peers, who verify the high academic and scientific quality of the articles submitted for their consideration.
  2. Editorial or writing boards: Each journal has an editorial or writing board. The members of this board will be recognized experts in the journal’s knowledge area.
  3. Contact information: The Universidad del Rosario journals will make available to the public the names of the members of the board and the contact information of published authors.
  4. Fees: University journals will provide information on the fees to be paid for the publication process. This information will be available to authors and the academic community in general at all times and especially prior to the process of submitting the article for evaluation.
  5. Copyrights: Journals will expressly include the editorial policies regarding the applicable copyrights so that authors and readers have no doubt regarding the modality under which the articles are made available to the public.
  6. Procedure for the identification, follow-up, and control of bad practices in publications: Journals’ editorial boards will take reasonable measures to identify and prevent the publication of works involving bad practices, such as plagiarism or high levels of similarity, improper citation, falsification of data, among others. The procedures adopted by the University to ensure this will correspond to the flowcharts provided by COPE2.
  7. Ownership and management: Each journal shall visibly include authorship details, as well as information regarding their management and operation.
  8. Web site:Each journal board will guarantee that the content hosted on its website meets the highest ethical and professional standards. The websites must neither include information that may mislead their readers and/or authors nor imitate information from other journals or publication.
  9. Name of the journal: The journal’s name should be visibly included and be clear among authors and readers. Efforts shall be made to guarantee the originality of the journal’s name so that it does not lead to confusion with other publications
  10. Conflict of interest: The journals should promote clear policies on the management of possible conflicts of interest of editors, authors, and peer reviewers. These policies must be aligned with the institutional code of ethics issued in Agreement 292 (June 22, 2022)3 and the international guidelines for scientific publishing defined by the regulatory bodies of scientific publications.
  11. Access: Open access to the contents of the University’s publications will be privileged and subject to abiding by recommendations and using licenses designed to protect authors’ rights. Modifications in this type of access will be indicated in the editorial policies of each of the publications, which will indicate the modality in which the journal and its content will be made available to readers.
  12. Income source: Journals are financed internally by the University. Differences in business models and/or source of income will be displayed on each journal’s website.
  13. Advertising: University journals will include only announcements and/or academic advertising; advertisements of any other nature will be prohibited.
  14. Publication schedule: The University’s journals shall include its annual editorial schedule on their websites in an accessible manner.
  15. Archiving: University journals shall have an electronic backup copy for the preservation of editorial content as stated in the preservation and self-archiving policy.
  16. Direct marketing: Any direct marketing activity, including the solicitation of articles on behalf of the journal, shall be appropriate, non-intrusive, and targeted.

In addition to the above principles, the University undertakes to comply with the following terms:

Confidentiality: The necessary measures will be implemented to ensure that the contents of the articles are kept confidential throughout the process before publication. Board members will maintain the confidentiality of the articles submitted for their consideration and will not disclose the information to third parties.

Ethics Committees: Editors or members of boards of University journals may request, at their own discretion or in accordance with the content of the publication, the opinion of the University’s Ethics Committee on contents so warranting it.

Independence: The members of the board of each University journal shall declare all possible conflicts of interest, whether political, social, intellectual, religious, personal, or others, when evaluating new content and deciding whether to include it in the journal. The board, led by the editor, should regulate the procedure to be followed in these cases.

To make the following guidelines known to the general community and especially to the councils:

  • Ethics guidelines for peers.
  • Retraction guidelines.
  • Any other guideline established by COPE to such end.

To ensure scientific and research integrity.

Report cases of proven misconduct that affect the reliability of published works: Both internal and external users may report to journal editors or to the editorial board of Universidad del Rosario any misconduct that may occur in our publications or editing processes, documenting the case with the relevant evidence, which will subsequently be notified and validated by the interested parties so as to establish the facts and possible measures to be adopted.

Initiate investigations into allegations of malpractice in research and/or errors in publication: the editor or editorial board will a) receive notifications of possible misconduct made by users against an editorial process or academic publication; they will then search, gather, and validate the evidence documenting the incident; b) refer to the institutional rules and international standards defined for scientific publication (supported by organizations such as COPE) to identify the scope, variables, and possible measures to be adopted in the case of an incident; c) present and discuss the case with the editorial committee to reach a consensual decision regarding the article; and d) in case of doubts or ambiguity regarding the case, it will be escalated to the institutional scientific integrity system, which will examine the case and produce a corresponding opinion.

The University’s journals shall comply with the following in addition to the previously mentioned requirements:

  • Publish the contact details of their editor-in-chief, who will act as a point of contact for research integrity and publication issues;
  • Inform other institutions if there is suspicion of misconduct by authors and provide evidence to support such concerns;
  • Authors, reviewers, editors, or others involved in the research should cooperate with investigations and respond to institutional inquiries about misconduct allegations;
  • prepared to issue retractions or corrections when misconduct by researchers and/or authors has been established as a result of a relevant investigation;
  • Have policies in place to respond to institutions and other organizations investigating cases of misconduct; and
  • Exchange information regarding cases of alleged malpractice to enable journals to conduct investigations more efficiently and effectively, with a view to preserving the integrity of the scientific record.

University journals shall adopt and follow the flowcharts in case of the following concerns:

  1. What to do if you suspect that a publication is redundant or duplicated (a) Suspected redundant publication in an article received?
  2. What to do if you suspect that a publication is redundant or duplicated (b) Suspected redundant publication in a published article?
  3. What to do if you suspect plagiarism (a) Suspected plagiarism in a received article?
  4. What to do if you suspect plagiarism (b) Suspected plagiarism in a published article?
  5. What to do if you suspect that there is fabricated data (a) Suspected fabricated data in a received article?
  6. What to do if you suspect that there is fabricated data (b) Suspected fabricated data in a published article?
  7. Authorship changes (a) The corresponding author requests to add an additional author before publication.
  8. Authorship changes (b) The corresponding author requests to remove an author before publication.
  9. Authorship changes (c) Request to add an additional author after publication.
  10. Authorship changes (d) Request to remove an author after publication
  11. What to do if the reviewer suspects that there is an undisclosed conflict of interest in an article received?
  12. What to do if a reader suspects that there is an undisclosed conflict of interest in a published article?
  13. What to do if you suspect that there is an ethical problem in an article received?
  14. Others, as may be indicated by COPE for this purpose.

Scientific Integrity

Universidad del Rosario’s editorial team recognizes the importance of guaranteeing the scientific integrity of our publications and upholds international standards, allowing the editorial board to apply current legal criteria in cases of defamation, copyright, and plagiarism to guarantee the quality of publications. Therefore, we recommend that the authors consider the following aspects:

    • Correction of the article by means of an editorial note: Journals will publish an explanatory note in case the author expresses disagreement or the need for correction after an article has been published4 in the following cases:
      • Error in the publication of small fragments deriving from an inaccuracy that does not invalidate the overall research and publication but that requires information precision and clarification (e.g., dates, names, graphs, tables, ambiguous text allowing double interpretation)
      • Inclusion or omission of authors or collaborators meeting the criteria defined in the classification of authors under the CRediT taxonomy5
      • Conflicts of interest disclosed after publication of the article
      • Clarification or follow-up notification of possible misconduct.

Errata will be published and labeled in a citable manner in the issue in which the original article appears. Errata notice citations will include the phrase “Errata from: [article title],” and the reference article citation will include the phrase “Errata in: [article title],” as indicated by the National Library of Medicine standard.

    • Article retraction6,7: Journals will announce the retraction of the article in all its publication versions (HTML, PDF, and others) after validation and identification of the reason without generating defamatory statements when the following exist:
      • Evidence of unreliable findings, unverified or non-reproducible data, falsification or manipulation of data, and methodological errors which invalidate the research
      • Plagiarism or self-plagiarism in the publication by the use of ideas, data, and results without the corresponding credit. The use of plagiarism verification tools will mediate this analysis. From a legal point of view, plagiarism in a text wherein a third party’s copyright is assumed as one’s own is not only an infringement of copyright law with civil consequences but also a crime under the Criminal Code.
      • Unauthorized use of protected works, which is an infringement of Intellectual Property Law
      • Manipulation of images, calculation, or experimental errors.
      • Prior publication of findings without attribution to the source, permission of the editor to republish, or justification of redundancy in the publication (even if published in an institutional repository)
      • Conflicts of interest in the peer-review process, which affects the quality and veracity of the article
      • Text that is defamatory or includes serious errors that could lead a researcher to use it to generate significant physical and/or mental harm to a patient (in the case of medical journals)
      • Research with images or information that violates individuals’ privacy, that has been presented without participants’ consent, or that infringes third parties’ intellectual property rights
      • Items that are the subject of court orders or represent an imminent health risk
      • Duplicate or redundant publication in which there is much similarity in the content and without permission to publish by the editor of the journal that published it for the first time cannot be considered for publication because it is not unpublished or original. The use of a substantial percentage of the work already published without acknowledgment (citation) and justification that strengthens the argument of the article is included.

The article will be preceded by the words “article retracted”; a corresponding note and watermark will also be included in the PDF on each page to notify readers about the retraction, and the HTML version of the article will be removed.

The retraction will be published and labeled in a citable manner in the issue in which the original article appears. Citations to retraction notices include the phrase “Retraction of: [article title],” and citations to retracted articles include the phrase “Retraction in: [article title],” as indicated by the National Library of Medicine standard.

Retraction does not occur under the following circumstances:

    • There is a dispute of authorship, but the validity of the findings is maintained.
    • The main findings of the research are valid, and the correction addresses the existing errors and concerns.
    • The evidence for retraction is inconclusive, and the article is under the process of verification prior to its withdrawal.
    • The author previously reported conflicts of interest and the editor considers that they do not affect the quality of the publication and its findings.
    • A limited part of the publication contains plagiarized text or text with errors, and this does not affect the validity of the study; correction of the article can be considered.

If the evidence is inconclusive or is not sufficiently reliable for the retraction of the article, the editor may consider publishing a publication note stating the corresponding observation on the possible misconduct that preceded the article.

Misconduct actions in publications8

  • Plagiarism: Improper use of a work by an author without the corresponding permission, credit, or acknowledgment. The flowchart provided by COPE for plagiarism in a submitted article9 and plagiarism in a published article10 is considered, taking into account the following forms:
    • Verbatim copy: Total or partial reproduction of a work without alterations and without permission or acknowledgment of the original source.
    • Substantial copy: Substantial reproduction (quantity and quality) of a work without permission or acknowledgment of the original source.
    • Paraphrasing: Copying but not reproducing words exactly from the original work, noting the quantity and quality of the text used without permission or acknowledgment to create the second work.
  • Improper use of images: Manipulating images to distort results is deemed research fraud11.
  • Omission of authors’ contributions: The author’s contribution must be described in the article, following the CRediT taxonomy12 adopted by the journal, so that the type of contribution made by each author to the work is identifiable, thus avoiding the inclusion of ghost authors who have not made a significant contribution (research, conception, design, execution or interpretation of the work). They must sign the publication letter of submission and account for the development of the work. Minor contributions that cannot be classified under authorship may be acknowledged in the collaboration and acknowledgments section. Journals adopt the guidelines for possible authorship problems13 as defined by COPE.
  • Omission of authorship and/or inappropriate attribution of authorship: Authors must declare in the publication letter of submission the type of contribution made and the total number of authors who took part in the publication and will support the publication with their signature. Journals are exempt from sharing responsibility in disputed authorship cases because the article’s signatories express their authorization at the beginning of the article submission process. Changes in authorship after submission and publication, additions or deletions, and ghost authorship14 are considered inappropriate conduct, and the COPE guidelines for detecting possible authorship problems is applied to these cases15.
  • Use of artificial intelligence systems: Artificial intelligence systems, specifically those based on large language models (LLMs) and artificial intelligence (AI), are not accepted as authors of texts because they do not meet the established requirements of authorship attribution. Further, the use of LLMs and AI should be documented in the methodology section or other suitable sections of the article, which makes authors responsible for the accuracy, integrity, and originality of their work even when using AI and LLMs so as to ensure compliance with the plagiarism prevention policy and the declaration of authorship16.
  • Publication duplicate: The simultaneous submission or publication of work is a literal duplication, partial but substantial duplication, or duplication by paraphrasing. Journals refrain from publishing articles previously published in full or a substantial part; previous publications of the text may affect originality. This is because of the possibility of disagreement when two (or more) journals claim the right to publish an article that has been submitted simultaneously to more than one journal; in such a case, two or more journals may simultaneously consider the work for publication unknowingly, submit it for peer review, edit, and then publish the same article17. When authors submit an article on research that has already been reported to a large extent in a published article or that is included in or closely related to another paper submitted or accepted for publication elsewhere, the cover letter should clearly state this and authors should provide copies of related material to help the editor decide how to handle the submission.
  • Omission and/or violation of research standards: Authors’ non-compliance with international regulations for the application of protocols in human and animal research or omission of permissions, patients’ informed consent, approvals of studies requiring compliance with local and international laws, and/or institutional permission from the authorities to carry out the research.
  • Manipulation in the peer-review process: To avoid any potential inappropriate conduct in peer-review processes, journals refrain from asking authors to suggest peers. Editorial teams guarantee through their processes the search for suitable peers for review, who shall declare any conflicts of interest18 they may have regarding the assigned publication. Journals refrain from assigning peers with the same institutional affiliation as the author or co-authors in previous works in which the author has participated. Internally, in the editorial board of the journal, the practices described in the guide for recognition of possible manipulation of the peer-review process provided by COPE are adopted19,20.
  • Citation manipulation: Inappropriate use of references to increase the author’s citations of a journal in which the author is an editor or a member of the editorial board or the same journal in which they are seeking to publish their work without any academic justification for such use of the reference to the article or whose relationship with the content is null is deemed an inappropriate practice, as per the following criteria on citation defined by COPE21 and the Council of Science Editors (CSE)22:
    • References that do not contribute to the academic content of the article constitute manipulative behavior.
    • Requests to include citations for self-promotional or conditional effects for publication (honorary citations) by the author or editor of the journal.
    • Excessive use of citations to the author’s publications to a particular journal and to the journal in which it is published with the purpose of increasing the citations of the work or publication.
    • Inappropriate collaboration between publications for the exchange of citations with each other (citation banner), regardless of the quality and contribution of the work to the new publication.
    • Accepting or requesting citations of articles in the journal to which the work is submitted for publication; each publication should establish a range of self-citations according to its area of knowledge.
    • Publishing editorials that indiscriminately cite a number of articles from the journal itself.

Declaration of Conflict of Interest in Publications

A conflict is considered to exist whenever a secondary interest may influence professional judgment about a primary interest (such as the well-being of patients and individuals involved in the research or the validity of research in the health or social sciences). To ensure transparency in author relationships to identify potential conflicts at the author, reviewer, and publication levels, the publishers adopt the guidelines defined by ICMJE23 and CSE24:

  • Financial relationships and study sponsorship agreements require a clear statement of the scope and independence of the research and academic freedom from the source of the resources.
  • Deliberate failure to report the relationships or activities specified in the journal’s disclosure form constitutes misconduct.
  • All participants in the publication process (authors, editors, reviewers, committee members) should consider and disclose their relationships or activities that may result in conflicts of interest.
  • Reviewers and editors should not use the knowledge of the work they are reviewing or editorially managing prior to publication to promote their own interests.
  • Authors should declare if there is any conflict of interest with funders, researchers, or institutions that could be involved in the publication.
  • articles should include statements that support a) the relationships and activities of the authors and funding sources, b) restrictions on publication, and c) scope of access of data use to determine responsibility for data integrity and accuracy of data analysis.
  • All research involving a research design with populations, communities, minors, or patients must include the corresponding informed consent forms and authorizations for data publication (in case of considering the publication of research data).
  • Whenever personal data is used, the owners’ consent must be obtained. It will be the authors’ responsibility to ensure that they have these authorizations and keep them in case they are required. Authors have the duty to defend the journal in the event of any claim made by a third party regarding the aforementioned authorization.
  • Reviewers must disclose possible personal or financial conflicts of interest with respect to the authors or the content of the articles they are asked to review.
  • Guest editors should consider disclosing financial relationships with the content and the subject matter of the special issue or supplement, ensure that all articles comply with the peer-review process, and that all articles are peer reviewed.

Scientific integrity for journals as per the Council of Science Editors25

Appeals, complaints, and disputes that arise during or after the peer-review process, including appeals against a review decision, suspicion of forced citation, or a reviewer being suspected of misappropriating material from the author, will be handled according to the flowchart provided by COPE26 to encourage the reporting of misconduct cues; evaluate allegations; and handle findings in the case of plagiarism, duplicate publication, data manipulation, changes in authorship, conflicts of interest, and other ethical issues that may lead to claims against editors, authors, and reviewers.

Data Availability27

The Universidad del Rosario journals will notify the availability of research data complementing publications in the journal portal when authors request it as long as they guarantee its quality and integrity and there are no restrictions in the publication. The data sets and codes (i.e., databases,

forms, repositories, and research procedures) that demonstrate the origin of the conclusions and results presented in the articles must comply with the principles of reproducibility and reusability, for which the TOP Guidelines28 and ICJME principles29 are adopted.

Authors of articles should state in the publication authorization the level of data availability and the security and confidentiality reasons for not publishing them or indicate the place of availability (it can be an external, specialized repository or the research data repository of Universidad del Rosario30). When data are included, they should be cited in the reference list and authors should cite them in the body of the text and include the DOI identifier of the data record. Specific cases of reproducibility will be treated according to COPE guidelines31.

When authors have worked with individuals in preparing their research work, it is necessary to have their approval by means of an informed consent form. Authors are responsible for guaranteeing the right to privacy of individuals in both text and images and shall delete any type of identification that could reveal their identity, unless they have the express approval of the individuals who participated in the research.

The most important thing in the publication of research data is to have the authorization of the data owners, that they have been informed of, and that they have accepted the purposes of such data use through the consent document. Thus, they must accept that the data will be published if it is one of the purposes of the research, and any non-compliance in this aspect will be the researchers’ legal responsibility.

The guidelines for transparency and openness promotion (TOP) include eight criteria32, which are adopted by publishers at the basic level for reference and access to data, codes, and materials used in research. By strengthening editorial processes and practices in aspects related to data and based on the specific characteristics of their field of knowledge, journals will determine in the authors’ guide the levels and criteria they adopt to ensure the quality of publications from the following levels33:

  • C1. Citation: (Level 1) The article provides the appropriate citation for data, codes, and materials according to the instructions to the authors, including the DOI identifier.
  • C2 to C4. Transparency of data, analytical methods, research materials: (Level 1) Data, codes, and research materials shall be deposited in a reliable repository. Exceptions should be indicated in the presentation of the article. If data are available, it is necessary to indicate where they can be accessed and include them in sections such as “data availability”/ “supplementary materials,” where access, DOI, and notes related to ethical and legal reasons for sharing data are included.
  • C5. Transparency of design and analysis: (Level 1) Research reports are subject to methodologies and standards specific to each area of knowledge; journals will adopt the one corresponding to their discipline according to the research area and the type of study. Compliance with the standard will be a requirement to be evaluated for the acceptance and publication of the article in such a way as to guarantee transparency in design and analysis. Authors should specify the type of research design and analytical methods used in their studies. Some of the existing standards may be found in https://www.equator-network.org/
  • C6-C7. Pre-record of study and analysis plan: (Level 1) Articles shall indicate if there is a pre-record of the study design, variables, and treatment conditions. The inclusion of an analysis plan implies the specification of the analysis sequence or the statistical model that will be reported, to which the journal should be allowed access during the peer-review process for verification. Authors shall include the clarification of the existence of an independent institutional registry in platforms such as https://www.socialscienceregistry.org/, https://help.osf.io/article/330-welcome-to-registrations, https://clinicaltrials.gov/, and https://egap.org/registry/.
  • C8. Replication: (Level 1) Reproducibility of data based on source data for independent replication of the methodology using the same materials. Editors will be free to decide to publish replication studies of research previously published in the journal.

Intellectual property:Publications of Universidad del Rosario adhere to the institutionally defined intellectual property policy34, license statement on all articles published in PDF and HTML, and rights to self-archive the publication according to Sherpa Romeo35.

Diversity, equity, and inclusion36: Adopting diversity, equity, and inclusion best practices promotes and sustains a journal’s commitment to sound ethical decision-making that can help shape publication processes with tasks such as peer review and editorial board appointments. These efforts can help ensure journal readers and the public of full transparency. Journals can take steps to achieve the important goals of diversity, equity, and inclusion. It is important for journals to ensure diverse representation when it comes to providing feedback. To ensure that staff leadership, external review panels, associate editors, editorial board members, statistical review committee members, guest editors, peer reviewers, subject matter consultants, journal leadership, and staff members are all represented, efforts should be made to go beyond familiar and often more comfortable representation. The journals demonstrate a conscious commitment to working against the unintentional promotion of one viewpoint or perspective at the expense of others, which can result in disengagement and reduced participation from diverse key stakeholders, by ensuring diversity of representation.

References

1 Universidad del Rosario (2021). Intellectual property policy of Universidad del Rosario. Available at: https://doi.org/10.48713/10336_33781

2 COPE (2008). Flowchart for suspected plagiarism in manuscripts received. Available at: https://redie.uabc.mx/public/journals/2/docs/COPE-diagrama-es.pdf

3 Universidad del Rosario (2022). Agreement 292. Available at: https://urosario.edu.co/static/Documentos/La-universidad/292-Codigo-de-Etica.pdf

4 Elsevier (2022). Legal guide for editors concerning ethics issue. Available at: https://www.elsevier.com/editors/perk/legal-guide-for-editors

5 NISO (2023). Contributor roles taxonomy. Available at: https://credit.niso.org/

6 COPE (2019). Retraction guidelines. Available at: https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.4

7 COPE (2021). Retraction guidelines. Available at: https://doi.org/10.24318/G5sxgs1t

8 COPE (2019). Responding to whistleblowers when concerns are raised directly (Flowchart). Available at: https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.2.25

9 COPE (2008 Transparency principles diagram. Plagiarism in a manuscript received. Available at: https://publicationethics.org/files/Spanish%20%281%29.pdf

10 COPE (2008 Transparency principles diagram. Plagiarism in a published manuscript. Available at: https://publicationethics.org/files/Spanish%20%281%29.pdf

11 COPE (2019). Image manipulation in published articles. Available at: https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.2.21

12 NISO (2023). Contributor roles taxonomy. Available at: https://credit.niso.org/

13 COPE (2019). How to recognize potential authorship problems. Available: https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.2.22

14 COPE (2019). Ghost, guest, or gift authorship suspected in paper. Available at: https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.2.18

15 COPE (2019). Warning signs that might indicate authorship problems. Available at: https://publicationethics.org/files/how-to-identify-authorship-problems-cope-flowchart.pdf

16 COPE (2023). Authorship and AI tools. COPE position statement. Available at: https://publicationethics.org/cope-position-statements/ai-author

17 ICMJE (2023).Overlapping Publications. Duplicate Submission. Available at: https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/publishing-and-editorial-issues/overlapping-publications.html

18 COPE. Guide on conflicts of interest. Available at: https://publicationethics.org/competinginterests

19 COPE (2015). How to spot manipulation of the peer-review process. Available: https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.2.15

20 COPE (2018). Ethical guidelines for peer reviewers. Available at: https://publicationethics.org/files/Ethical_Guidelines_For_Peer_Reviewers_2_LASpanish.pdf

21 COPE (2019) Citation manipulation. Available at: https://publicationethics.org/files/COPE_DD_A4_Citation_Manipulation_Jul19_SCREEN_AW2.pdf

22 Council of Science Editors (2018). Recommendations for promoting integrity in scientific journal publications. 2.1.5 citation manipulation. Available at: https://www.councilscienceeditors.org/recommendations-for-promoting-integrity-in-scientific-journal-publications-

23 ICMJE (2022). Recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing, and publication of scholarly work in medical journals. Available at: https://www.icmje.org/icmje-recommendations.pdf

24 Council of Science Editors (2018). Recommendations for promoting integrity in scientific journal publications. https://www.councilscienceeditors.org/recommendations-for-promoting-integrity-in-scientific-journal-publications-

25 Council of Science Editors (2018). Recommendations for promoting integrity in scientific journal publications: https://www.councilscienceeditors.org/recommendations-for-promoting-integrity-in-scientific-journal-publications-

26 COPE (2008). COPE flowchart. Available at: https://publicationethics.org/files/Spanish%20%281%29.pdf

27 COPE Data and reproducibility. Available at: https://publicationethics.org/data

28 Center for Open Science (2015) Transparency and openness promotion guidelines. Available at: https://www.cos.io/initiatives/top-guidelines

29 ICMJE (2023). Clinical trials. Available at: https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/publishing-and-editorial-issues/clinical-trial-registration.html

30 Universidad del Rosario. Research data repository. Available at: https://research-data.urosario.edu.co/

31 COPE. Data and reproducibility. Available at: https://publicationethics.org/data

32 Center for Open Science (2015) Transparency and openness promotion guidelines. Available: https://www.cos.io/initiatives/top-guidelines

33 SciELO (2018). Guidelines for promoting openness, transparency and reproducibility of research published by SciELO journals. Available at: https://wp.scielo.org/wp-content/uploads/Guia_TOP_es.pdf

34 Universidad del Rosario (2021). University President Decree 1719. Available at: https://repository.urosario.edu.co/server/api/core/bitstreams/cf1bb1a8-e171-4572-be35-17be43fd951d/content

35 Registration in Sherpa Romeo for Universidad del Rosario journals. Available at: https://v2.sherpa.ac.uk/id/publisher/62894?template=romeo

36 Council of Science Editors (2022). Recommendations for Promoting Integrity in Scientific Journal Publications. 2.7 Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Scholarly Publishing. Available at: https://www.councilscienceeditors.org/recommendations-for-promoting-integrity-in-scientific-journal-publications-