The ECiencia Statement on Ethics and Malpractice in Scientific Publication supports the collective efforts of authors, editors, and reviewers to ensure responsible research publication.

This statement is based on ethical principles that broadly follow the guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

1. Responsibilities of Authors

• Manuscripts submitted for publication must be the result of original and unpublished research, including the data obtained and an objective discussion of their results. Sufficient information must be provided so that any specialist can replicate the research and confirm or refute the proposed interpretations.
• Authors must refrain from engaging in scientific misconduct or breaching publication ethics. This includes presenting results clearly and honestly, without falsification or inappropriate data manipulation.
• It is essential that the data and results presented are original, not copied, fabricated, distorted, or manipulated. Plagiarism, multiple or redundant publication, and data fabrication or manipulation constitute serious ethical violations and are considered scientific fraud.
• Authors must provide appropriate acknowledgment and ensure that all authors have made significant contributions to the research. Deliberate misrepresentation of a scientist’s relationship with the published work must be avoided.
• Authors are responsible for informing the editor of any direct or indirect conflicts of interest with editors, members of the editorial team, or the international scientific committee.
• No significant part of the article should have been previously published or be under consideration by another publisher or journal. If an author discovers a serious error in their work, they are obligated to notify the journal as soon as possible to amend the article, withdraw it, retract it, or publish a correction or erratum.
• If an error is detected by the Editorial Committee, the author must demonstrate the accuracy of their work.
• All authors are required to participate in a peer-review process for the submitted materials.

2. Responsibilities of Editors

The Editorial Team will be impartial in managing submissions proposed for publication and will respect the intellectual independence of authors, acknowledging their right to respond in case of a negative evaluation.

• Members of the Editorial Team must maintain the confidentiality of received manuscripts and their content until they are accepted for publication. Only then may the title and authorship be disclosed.
• No member of the Editorial Board may use data, arguments, or interpretations from unpublished works for their own research, except with the express written consent of the authors.

2.1. Publication Decision

• All contributions will be initially evaluated by the Editorial Team, which is responsible for selecting, processing, and deciding which articles meet the editorial objectives and can be published. Each manuscript deemed suitable will be sent to two independent reviewers, experts in the field, to assess its specific qualities. The editor is responsible for the final decision on the acceptance or rejection of the manuscript.
• The decision to publish an article will be based on its relevance to researchers, professionals, and potential readers. Editors must make impartial decisions, regardless of commercial considerations.
• Editors with conflicts of interest or relationships that pose potential issues regarding the articles under consideration must recuse themselves from editorial decisions. The responsibility for the final decision will fall to an editor without conflicts of interest.

2.2. Manuscript Review

• The Editorial Board will ensure that published works have been evaluated by at least two subject matter experts, guaranteeing a fair and impartial review process.
• Reviewed articles will be treated confidentially by the editorial team, the international scientific committee, and the reviewers.
• The Editorial Board will value and appreciate the contributions of those who have participated in the evaluation of manuscripts and will exclude those who provide low-quality, incorrect, disrespectful, or late evaluations.

2.3. Identification and Prevention of Misconduct

• Members of the editorial and scientific committees will neither encourage nor permit any form of misconduct.
• Authors and reviewers will be informed about the expected ethical behavior to prevent misconduct. Reviewers and committee members will be vigilant for potential misconduct in the reviewed manuscripts and will handle complaints accordingly.
• In cases of misconduct, the journal editor is responsible for resolving the issue, working in collaboration with the editorial committee, scientific committee, reviewers, and subject matter experts. The issue will be documented in detail, and all relevant documents will be retained.
• The editor will contact the involved author to provide them an opportunity to respond or comment on the complaint, allegation, or dispute.
• In cases of misconduct, necessary corrections, or reversals, the editorial committee will act in accordance with COPE recommendations. Honest human errors will be carefully distinguished from deliberate intent to defraud.
• The editorial board will consider retracting a publication in cases of misconduct, issuing a note in cases of inconclusive evidence of misconduct, or requesting correction of the problematic segment.

3. Responsibilities of Reviewers

• Reviewers must be familiar with the journal’s editorial policy and its statement on ethics and malpractice.
• Reviewers are required to have significant scientific or professional experience in a relevant field. They must have conducted recent research and have expertise recognized by their peers.
• Reviewers must recuse themselves if they do not consider themselves qualified to evaluate a manuscript, believe they cannot be objective, or have conflicts of interest.
• Reviewers must identify relevant published works that have not been cited in the reviewed material, and if necessary, the editor may request corrections.
• Reviewers are asked to identify any signs of research misconduct and report them to the editorial committee for action.

4. Conflict of Interest

• Members of the editorial team and reviewers will recuse themselves in cases of conflicts of interest regarding an author or the content of a manuscript under evaluation. Any conflict of interest between authors, reviewers, editorial team members, and the scientific committee will be avoided.
• Editors and reviewers must recuse themselves from making decisions when:
  • There is a direct relationship between an author and a reviewer.
  • There has been recent and significant professional collaboration between reviewers and authors.
  • An editor or reviewer is a collaborator on the submitted project.
  • The editor or reviewer has a financial interest in a company, or a competitor with a financial interest in the manuscript.
  • The editor or reviewer believes they cannot be objective, whether for personal reasons or due to a financial interest not covered elsewhere in the policy.

This policy aims to ensure impartiality and integrity in ECiencia’s editorial process.