Ethics Policies and Good Editorial Practices

The Revista CIE (Academic Journal CIE) is committed to ensuring an editorial process with the most rigorous ethical standards, promoting that authors, editors, reviewers and administrative staff participate in an environment of responsibility and honesty in which the relevance and scientific quality of the material to be published, as well as inclusion and diversity, are privileged.

Editors and reviewers must ensure that the process is conducted under a double-blind peer review (in which authors and reviewers do not know each other) and adhere to the assigned review deadlines. If they are unable to meet these deadlines, they must excuse themselves so that researchers with availability and no conflicts of interest can take their place. They also commit to not using or disclosing any information received from the authors in the articles under review.

In pursuit of transparency and scientific accuracy, Revista CIE adopts the guidelines established by COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) https://publicationethics.org/core-practices for the establishment of editorial conduct policies. These policies ensure that the academic community has access to research with high-quality standards, whose scientific value will contribute to the growth of educational research at the regional, national, and international levels.

Author’s Commitments

Authors commit to:

  • Accepting responsibility for the written information and statements expressed in their research.
  • Clearly providing the sources of the ideas presented in the submitted research.
  • Ensuring the originality of the research submitted to the journal.
  • Communicating any errors identified in the research.
  • Indicating any sources of funding if applicable to the submitted research.
  • Respecting intellectual property by properly crediting all cited information.
  • Avoiding the submission of research with an internal structure or methodology identical to another study.
  • Guaranteeing proper citation of sources, tables, figures, and graphics.
  • Not manipulating research results.
  • If withdrawing a submission, formally requesting its withdrawal through a written communication addressed to the editorial committee.

Editor Commitments

Editors commit to:

  • Ensuring a transparent and clear peer review process for research.
  • Establishing timely response periods for researchers.
  • Notifying authors of evaluation results through written communication.
  • Upholding freedom of expression for researchers.
  • Conducting an annual review of the panel of reviewers established by the journal.
  • Guaranteeing the exchange of information and knowledge between the editorial committee and advisors to foster new ideas that improve the editorial process.
  • Performing periodic reviews of the editorial board, advisors, and committees.

Reviewer Commitments

Reviewers commit to:

  • Justifying their observations made during the research evaluation process.
  • Monitoring and reviewing content to identify any irregular practices.
  • Respecting the double-blind review system; if the process is compromised and the author's identity is revealed due to an error, the reviewer must notify the editorial team and withdraw from the review.
  • Ensuring content clarity and coherence to uphold scientific quality standards.
  • Thoroughly reviewing methodology and results to detect any potential irregularities.
  • Providing timely responses in the peer review process.

 

 

On the Studies to Be Published

The identity and personal data of study participants must be protected, ensuring that informed consent is obtained before disclosing any confidential information. 

For studies in the health field, explicit mention must be made of the ethics committee that approved the research protocol. If the study involved human subjects, it must be explicitly stated that written informed consent was obtained from them.  All procedures involving human subjects must comply with the ethical standards for human experimentation outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki (1975). 

The editors reserve the right to reject any studies that raise concerns regarding the adequacy of permissions or the proper application of procedures.