Statement on Publishing Ethics and Misconduct

Our journal adheres to the guidelines laid out by COPE's Editorial Best Practice and the Publisher's Code of Conduct.

We expect our writers, reviewers, and editors to be in line with these ethical standards.

For a detailed view, we advise checking the mentioned documents. However, here's a brief overview:

Editorial Responsibilities

Maintaining Integrity and Independence

All manuscripts undergo a review based on academic worthiness. This includes their relevance, originality, research validity, clarity, and fit with the journal's focus. Reviews are free from bias, regardless of an author's background, beliefs, nationality, orientation, political stance, or institutional association. Decisions related to editing and publication remain untouched by external pressures or governmental rules. The Head Editor has the final say on the journal's editorial content and when it's published.

Preserving Confidentiality

Details about submitted works remain confidential, limited to the author, potential reviewers, editorial advisors, and our publishing team.

Openness and Conflict Resolution

Unpublished information from submissions isn't used for personal research by our editorial team without the author's consent. All sensitive insights acquired during the manuscript evaluation stay private and aren't used for personal gain. If conflicts emerge linking editors to authors or affiliated institutions, those editors will recuse themselves, entrusting another board member.

Publication Decisions

Every manuscript undergoes a strict peer-review process involving at least two experts. The responsibility of choosing pieces to publish lies with the Head Editor, taking into account the research's significance, its contribution to academia, feedback, and adherence to legal norms. Other editors or reviewers might be consulted during this process.

For ethical issues concerning a manuscript or published work, appropriate actions will be taken, following COPE Flowcharts for suspected misconduct. Should concerns be confirmed, the necessary corrections or retractions will be made in the journal.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Aiding Editorial Choices

Peer reviews help in editorial choices and can guide authors to refine their work. This process is crucial for academic dialogue. We believe that all researchers should actively participate in the review process.

Timeliness

Reviewers who feel inadequate or unable to promptly review should notify the editors promptly, allowing for alternative reviewers to be sought.

Keeping Things Private

Manuscripts under review are confidential and shouldn't be disclosed or discussed unless approved by the Chief Editor. This also applies to those who decline to review.

Being Objective

Reviews should be unbiased, with clear feedback for authors to enhance their work. Personal remarks about authors are unwarranted.

Citing Sources

Reviewers should point out any unmentioned influential publications. Any similarity to other known manuscripts should be reported to the editors.

Declaring Conflicts and Maintaining Confidentiality

Reviewers with potential conflicts should inform the editors and refuse the review. Information from the manuscript shouldn't be used for personal benefits, including by those who turn down the review request.

Author Responsibilities

Maintaining High Reporting Standards

Original research reports should be accurate, encompassing a factual representation of the work and its importance. Sufficient details and citations should be included. Deliberate misrepresentations are deemed unethical.

Data Availability and Preservation

Authors might need to share their raw data during the review, ensuring it remains accessible for a decade post-publication, considering confidentiality and proprietary rights.

Originality and Respecting Intellectual Property

Authors have a responsibility to ensure that their submissions are entirely their own creations. Any borrowed insights, ideas, or verbiage must be appropriately acknowledged. Key publications that have shaped or influenced the research presented should be clearly cited. Plagiarism, in every shade, whether it's presenting someone else's work as one's own or not attributing borrowed parts of another's work, is a breach of publishing ethics and will not be tolerated.

Originality

The articles must be original, unpublished and not approved for publication in other journals. Articles are accepted in Spanish and English. They may be the result of research or knowledge acquired by the author in his or her professional career. Any socialization of results related to the written topic may be done after the publication of the corresponding Research and Development Journal.

The articles must be aligned to the areas of knowledge established by the Technical University of Ambato, and the lines of research currently approved in the Research Plan of the Research and Development Department.

Antiplagiarism

All research received for publication in this journal are subjected to anti-plagiarism review by URKUND software where grammatical and orthotypographic coincidences should not exceed 8%, otherwise the article is rejected, ensuring that the works are unpublished and meet the standards of editorial quality that guarantee own scientific production. 

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

Authors should not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently is unethical and unacceptable.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of the Manuscript

Only individuals who have made a significant contribution to the study should be listed as authors. Others who have contributed should be recognized as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors are listed and no undeserving individuals are included in the author list.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental Mistakes in Published Works

If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, they must promptly notify the journal's editor or publisher and collaborate with them to either correct the paper or retract it.

Respect for Human and Animal Rights

If the work involves experiments on human subjects or animals, the author should ensure that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and guidelines and that the appropriate institutional approvals were obtained. Any potential harm to these subjects must be minimized and all participants should provide informed consent.

In conclusion, adhering to these guidelines not only maintains the integrity of the scientific community but also ensures the credibility of the authors, reviewers, and editors involved in the publication process. The journal emphasizes the importance of ethical considerations and expects everyone involved to uphold these standards diligently.

Author Challenges Writers have the opportunity to contest a rejection by addressing an email to the Journal's Editorial Division. This contestation should offer a comprehensive rationale, encompassing itemized rebuttals to feedback provided by reviewers and/or the Editor, structured on a specified appeal document. Challenges are only valid post a “reject with no resubmission” resolution and are to be lodged within a 90-day window from the date of the decision. Any discrepancies with these prerequisites will disqualify the challenge from further assessment. The Editorial Coordinator will transmit the article, accompanied by pertinent details (inclusive of referee identifications), to an appointed Editorial Board representative. The solicited Academic Editor will be required to render a provisional recommendation on the manuscript. They might propose its endorsement, instigate another round of peer evaluation, or sustain the initial rejection. This resolution subsequently seeks affirmation from the Editor-in-Chief. Any rejection rendered at this point is determinate and irrevocable.

Post-Submission Refinement Investigación y Desarrollo's internal squads are responsible for manuscript enhancement, which includes linguistic refinement, content structure, and transposition to XML. Linguistic amendments are administered by our adept English editors. In sporadic circumstances where elaborate editing or configuration is mandated, we extend to writers an English revision service at an auxiliary charge (contingent on their endorsement). Conversely, authors hold the autonomy to resort to external English editing avenues, or liaise with a native English speaker, the latter being our recommended route.

Ethical Protocols in Publishing

Our publications strictly adhere to COPE's strategies for confronting potential ethical transgressions by contributors, assessors, or editors. Every editorial individual at Investigación y Desarrollo is well-versed in identifying and maneuvering ethical predicaments.

Insights on ethical prerequisites for manuscript submissions are housed in the journal's guide for authors. Kindly peruse our guidelines regarding amendments to published content.

Ethical apprehensions flagged by our readership will be rigorously examined by the editorial sector, in adherence to COPE's stipulated protocols. Controversies surrounding the credibility of disclosed research within published pieces can be mediated by the Editorial Board. In confrontations enveloping matters of author identity, data guardianship, professional transgressions, etc., we might necessitate liaison with external bodies, such as academic ethical committees. We obligate writers to proactively address verified claims levied against them.