Ethical Guidelines

Authors' Responsibilities

Authors who submit their academic contributions to El Capacho Scientific Journal assume the fundamental commitment to guarantee the absolute originality of their research work. This commitment implies that the manuscript presented constitutes an unprecedented contribution to the field of science and technology, having not been previously published in any academic, commercial, or institutional medium, nor being under simultaneous consideration by another scientific publication. Originality extends not only to the substantive content of the research but also to the presentation, analysis, and interpretation of the data and results obtained.

Authorial responsibility requires ensuring legitimate authorship and establishing the appropriate order of authors according to their specific contributions to the development of the research. Each person included as an author must have participated substantially in the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study presented, having contributed significantly to the writing of the manuscript or to its critical review with important intellectual contributions. The order of authorship must faithfully reflect the level of participation of each contributor, and all authors must approve the final version of the manuscript before submission, assuming public responsibility for the appropriate content of the work.

Authors have the ethical obligation to declare any conflict of interest that may influence the interpretation of results or the conduct of research. This declaration must include financial, professional, personal, or institutional relationships with organizations or individuals who may have an interest in the results of the work. Likewise, they must specify the funding sources that supported the research, including project numbers, grants, or contracts, and acknowledge the institutional support received during the development of the study.

Respect for intellectual property rights constitutes a fundamental pillar of academic integrity that authors must observe scrupulously. This implies appropriate recognition of all sources consulted through a rigorous and consistent citation system, obtaining necessary permissions for the reproduction of material protected by copyright, and correct attribution of ideas, methodologies, data, or interpretations from other researchers. Authors must avoid plagiarism in all its forms, including self-plagiarism, and guarantee that the contributions of other researchers are recognized appropriately and completely.

The obligation to keep research data available responds to the principles of transparency and scientific reproducibility that characterize quality research. Authors must preserve complete and accurate records of their primary data, applied methodologies, and procedures followed during the development of research, keeping them available for verification by reviewers, editors, or the scientific community for a minimum period of five years after publication. This availability must guarantee compliance with ethical protocols of confidentiality when research involves sensitive data or personal information.

Finally, authors assume the responsibility of reporting errors detected in their work after publication, actively collaborating with the editorial team to implement necessary corrections. This responsibility includes immediate notification of significant errors that may affect the study's conclusions, provision of detailed information about the nature of the error, and cooperation in preparing corrections, clarifications, or, in serious cases, retraction of the article according to international standards of editorial ethics.

Reviewers' Responsibilities

Reviewers of El Capacho Scientific Journal play a crucial role in maintaining scientific quality standards and must maintain absolute confidentiality regarding all aspects of the evaluation process. This confidentiality extends to the complete content of the manuscript, observations made during evaluation, the identity of authors when the process is anonymous, and any communication related to the review. Reviewers must not share, discuss, or use information obtained during the review process with third parties, nor employ such information for personal or professional benefit, keeping these materials under strict reserve until the article is officially published.

The declaration of conflicts of interest by reviewers is fundamental to preserving the objectivity of the academic evaluation process. Reviewers must identify and communicate to the editorial team any personal, professional, institutional, or financial relationship with authors that may compromise their ability to provide an impartial evaluation. This includes recent collaborations, mentorship relationships, direct competition in the same research line, significant institutional links, or any financial interest in the results of the work under review.

Objective evaluation constitutes the core of the reviewer's responsibility, who must base their judgments exclusively on the academic and scientific merit of the manuscript. Comments and recommendations must be based on rigorous scientific criteria, evaluating originality, methodology, validity of results, clarity of presentation, and relevance to the field of science and technology. Reviewers must avoid biases based on considerations unrelated to academic merit, such as nationality, gender, institutional affiliation, or personal theoretical preferences.

Providing constructive feedback represents an invaluable contribution to scientific development and the improvement of academic research. Reviewers must offer detailed, specific, and well-founded comments that allow authors to understand the strengths and weaknesses of their work. This feedback must include concrete suggestions for improving methodology, clarifying presentation, strengthening argumentation, or expanding the discussion of results. Comments must be expressed respectfully and professionally, recognizing the authors' effort while pointing out areas that require attention or improvement.

Compliance with established deadlines for review is essential to maintain the efficiency of the editorial process and guarantee the timely dissemination of scientific knowledge. Reviewers commit to completing their evaluation within the agreed time, which normally does not exceed four weeks from receipt of the manuscript. When unforeseen circumstances prevent compliance with the established schedule, the reviewer must immediately notify the editorial team, explaining the situation and requesting a reasonable extension of the deadline, or decline the invitation to review to allow the timely assignment of another qualified evaluator.

Editorial Responsibilities

The editorial team of El Capacho Scientific Journal commits to maintaining the integrity of the editorial process through the implementation of transparent, equitable, and consistent procedures that guarantee impartial evaluation of all received manuscripts. This integrity is based on decision-making based exclusively on academic merit, without consideration of factors unrelated to scientific quality such as nationality, gender, institutional affiliation, religious or political beliefs of the authors. The editorial process must be conducted in a manner that preserves appropriate confidentiality and maintains the academic community's trust in the procedures followed by the journal.

Quality assurance in publications constitutes a fundamental responsibility that the editorial team fulfills through the implementation of a rigorous peer review system involving expert evaluators in the corresponding thematic areas. This commitment includes careful selection of qualified reviewers, supervision of the evaluation process to ensure that appropriate academic standards are met, and making editorial decisions based on received evaluations and objective scientific criteria. The editorial team must stay updated regarding international best practices in scientific editing and continuously apply improvements to their procedures.

Prevention of plagiarism and scientific misconduct requires the implementation of proactive and reactive measures that protect the integrity of published scientific literature. This includes systematic use of specialized software for similarity detection and possible plagiarism, verification of the originality of received content, and establishment of clear protocols to investigate allegations of scientific misconduct. When cases of plagiarism, data fabrication, result falsification, or any other form of misconduct are identified, the editorial team must act following international guidelines established by organizations such as the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Management of appeals and complaints must be carried out through formal, transparent, and timely procedures that guarantee fair treatment of all parties involved. The editorial team will establish clear mechanisms to receive, evaluate, and respond to appeals against editorial decisions, complaints about the review process, or allegations of inappropriate conduct. These procedures must be handled impartially, with defined deadlines for response, and with the possibility of escalation to higher instances when necessary. Appropriate documentation of these processes is essential to maintain transparency and accountability.

The editorial team must ensure transparency in editorial decisions through clear communication of criteria used for evaluation, procedures followed during the review process, and reasons that support decisions of acceptance, revision, or rejection of manuscripts. This transparency includes publication of clear and accessible editorial policies, declaration of conflicts of interest of the editorial team, and maintenance of appropriate records of the review process. Authors must receive sufficient and constructive feedback that allows them to understand the decisions made and, when appropriate, improve their contributions for future consideration.