Statement of ethics and editorial malpractice

Argos Journal, an electronic continuous-publication journal of Philosophy, Literature and Humanities of the University of Guadalajara, publishes approximately 50 articles per year, resulting from scientific research by national and international authors, as well as original and unpublished literary works by members of the literary and artistic community with recognised professional standing in the fields of the Social Sciences and Humanities. Its main objective is to disseminate scholarly knowledge and literary works and make them available to the wider community through a comprehensive open-access system.

Accordingly, Argos Journal is committed to promoting academic integrity, editorial transparency and best practices in scholarly communication. In the development of its editorial processes, the journal adopts as a frame of reference the principles, recommendations and guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), as well as international standards concerning publication ethics and scholarly publishing, ensuring editorial autonomy, impartiality in decision-making and respect for the rights of authors, reviewers and readers.

Editorial decisions, peer-review procedures, the resolution of disputes and the handling of possible ethical breaches shall be guided by these principles, while at all times respecting the journal’s editorial autonomy, academic freedom, the confidentiality of the review process and the rights of authors, reviewers and readers.

Articles submitted to Argos Journal for consideration for future publication undergo different review processes, including technical, methodological and content-related assessment. On average, three reviews are carried out for each article prior to publication, and each reviewer, including editors and referees, is responsible for the corresponding stage of the process. Therefore, every member of the editorial team, including reviewers, must objectively adhere to the ethical criteria established by the journal and undertake to act objectively, professionally and ethically at all stages of the editorial process.

1. RESPONSIBILITIES OF PARTICIPANTS IN THE EDITORIAL PROCESS

1.1. Responsibilities of the Editorial Team

The editorial team of Argos Journal is responsible for ensuring the integrity, academic quality, transparency and objectivity of the editorial processes, as well as safeguarding the ethical principles that govern scholarly publishing.

The editorial team shall be responsible for:

  • Ensuring compliance with the editorial policy, ethical standards and best practices in scholarly publishing.
  • Ensuring that manuscripts are assessed solely on the basis of their academic quality, originality, methodological rigour, thematic relevance and contribution to knowledge.
  • Promoting impartiality, confidentiality and transparency throughout all stages of the editorial process.
  • Appointing reviewers with the necessary academic expertise and competence to assess the manuscripts received.
  • Responding promptly to complaints concerning possible ethical breaches, conflicts of interest or editorial irregularities.
  • Protecting the confidentiality of manuscripts and of the information obtained during the review processes.
  • Refraining from using unpublished information for personal, institutional or third-party benefit.
  • Properly managing any conflicts of interest that may arise during the editorial process.
  • Adopting the necessary measures to correct, clarify, retract or update publications when circumstances so require.
  • Promoting a culture of academic integrity, respect, inclusion and scientific responsibility.

Editorial decisions shall be made independently, objectively and in accordance with strictly academic criteria, without discrimination on the grounds of nationality, ethnic origin, gender, sexual orientation, religion, institutional affiliation, ideological position or any other condition unrelated to the scientific quality of the submitted work.

1.2. Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers are a fundamental element in ensuring the academic quality of the journal’s publications. Their participation shall be governed by the principles of objectivity, confidentiality, impartiality and academic respect.

Reviewers shall:

  • Accept only those review assignments for which they have the necessary training, expertise and availability.
  • Issue objective, well-founded assessments based on academic criteria.
  • Contribute to strengthening and improving manuscripts through clear, respectful and constructive observations.
  • Maintain the confidentiality of manuscripts and of all information obtained during the review process.
  • Promptly inform the editorial team of any possible conflict of interest that may compromise their impartiality.
  • Refrain from using, reproducing or disseminating information contained in the manuscripts under review.
  • Refrain from using any artificial intelligence tool for the review and assessment of a manuscript.
  • Inform the journal when they detect possible cases of plagiarism, redundant publication, data manipulation or other conduct contrary to academic ethics.
  • Comply with the deadlines established for completing reviews or promptly communicate any circumstance preventing them from completing the assessment.

The observations issued shall focus exclusively on the academic content of the manuscript, avoiding any offensive, discriminatory or non-scientific expression.

1.3. Responsibilities of Authors

Authors are responsible for the intellectual content of manuscripts submitted to the journal and shall act with honesty, transparency and adherence to the principles of academic integrity.

Authors shall:

  • Submit original and unpublished works that are not simultaneously under review by other publications.
  • Guarantee the authenticity, accuracy and reliability of the data, arguments, results and interpretations included in their contributions.
  • Properly acknowledge the sources, ideas, data, images, tables, graphs and other materials used in the preparation of their works.
  • Declare any conflict of interest that may influence the interpretation or presentation of the results.
  • Respect the editorial, ethical and citation standards established by the journal.
  • Ensure that all persons listed as authors have made substantial academic contributions to the submitted work.
  • Obtain the necessary authorisations for the use of copyrighted materials where applicable.
  • Transparently disclose the use of artificial intelligence tools in accordance with the journal’s editorial policies.
  • Collaborate with the editorial team when clarifications, corrections or supplementary information are required during the editorial process.
  • Promptly notify the journal of any significant error detected after publication of the article.

Authors shall retain full responsibility for the content of their contributions, even when they have used technological support tools during the development of the research or the drafting of the manuscript.

2. UNETHICAL CONDUCT

Sincronía considers the following to constitute scientific misconduct and practices contrary to academic integrity:

  • Total or partial plagiarism of third-party works, or plagiarism in any of the forms described herein.
  • Fabrication, alteration or falsification of data, evidence, results or documentary sources.
  • Deliberate manipulation of information for the purpose of modifying or distorting the conclusions of a study.
  • Unjustified omission of authors who have made substantial contributions to the work.
  • Inclusion of honorary, fictitious or non-contributing authors.
  • Simultaneous submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal without disclosing this circumstance.
  • Improper manipulation of bibliographic citations for personal, institutional or editorial benefit.
  • Use of false identities during the review process.
  • Deliberate concealment of conflicts of interest.
  • Any other conduct that violates the principles of honesty, transparency, responsibility and academic rigour that must govern scholarly communication.

The detection of any of the practices described above may result in rejection of the manuscript, suspension of the editorial process, retraction of published works or any other measure that the journal deems appropriate according to the seriousness of the case.

Argos Journal considers plagiarism to be any improper appropriation of ideas, texts, data, images, research results or any other intellectual creation belonging to third parties, presenting them as one’s own or without due acknowledgement of the original authorship.

The main forms of plagiarism include the following:

  • Direct plagiarism: When a text, work, image, table, graph or any other content is transcribed, copied or reproduced literally without authorisation from the original author or without clearly indicating the source. Direct plagiarism also occurs when credit is not given to the original author; when minimal changes are made to the cited text in order to present it as one’s own; or when some words are replaced with synonyms while maintaining the structure and meaning of the original text.
  • Indirect plagiarism: When citation and referencing systems are used incorrectly; when a direct quotation is not properly delimited by quotation marks, indentation or other typographical devices; when quoted text continues beyond the limits of the citation; when paraphrases remain too close to the original text; or when the source of the ideas, arguments or concepts used is omitted.
  • Reference plagiarism: When quotations are attributed to authors other than the true authors; when bibliographic references contain false, incomplete or altered information; when a source that was not directly consulted is cited; when non-existent references are included; or when there is inconsistency between the citations incorporated into the text and the final list of references.
  • Self-plagiarism or text recycling: When previously published works by the same author are reused in whole or in part without clearly indicating their origin; when already published texts are presented as unpublished; when substantial fragments of previous publications are reused without due reference; or when research results are duplicated in order to artificially increase academic output.
  • Mosaic or patchwork plagiarism: When a text is constructed by combining fragments from various sources, integrating them partially or in modified form without properly acknowledging the authorship of each source. This form may include the mixture of direct quotations, paraphrases and rewritten fragments in order to create an appearance of originality.
  • Paraphrase plagiarism: When a third-party text is superficially reformulated by changing some words, expressions or the order of ideas, while essentially preserving the argumentative structure, intellectual content or reasoning of the original author without giving due credit.
  • Translation plagiarism: When a published work in another language is translated in whole or in part and presented as original work without indicating the source or acknowledging the corresponding authorship.
  • Plagiarism of ideas or concepts: When hypotheses, theories, interpretations, methodologies, analytical models or intellectual proposals developed by other authors are used without properly acknowledging their contribution, even when there is no textual copying.
  • Plagiarism of research data and results: When data, statistics, databases, experimental results, interviews, observations, documentary records or any other product derived from research are used without authorisation or without acknowledgement of the original source.
  • Plagiarism of images, tables, graphs and audiovisual material: When photographs, illustrations, diagrams, maps, tables, graphs, infographics, videos, audio recordings or any other visual or multimedia resource are reproduced without authorisation, without appropriate reference or in breach of the corresponding copyright.
  • Plagiarism of secondary sources: When an original work that has not been directly consulted is cited and the information has been obtained through a secondary source, thereby creating a false impression that the primary source was consulted.
  • Structural plagiarism: When the organisation, argumentative sequence, methodology, analytical structure or general design of another work is reproduced without necessarily copying the text, but by appropriating its intellectual construction.
  • Plagiarism through artificial intelligence: When ideas, arguments, analyses, bibliographic syntheses, translations, interpretations or content generated by artificial intelligence systems are presented as one’s own without disclosure in accordance with the journal’s editorial policies, especially when this involves concealing the true origin of the content or claiming intellectual capacities that do not correspond to the author.

The detection of any of these forms of plagiarism may result in the immediate rejection of the manuscript, suspension of the editorial process, retraction of previously published articles or any other measure that the journal deems appropriate to safeguard the academic and scientific integrity of its publications.

3. PROCEDURES FOR THE RESOLUTION OF CONFLICTS, VIOLATIONS AND UNETHICAL CONDUCT

3.1. Identification of Unethical Conduct

Any person may submit a complaint to Argos Journal concerning possible ethical breaches, editorial irregularities or conduct contrary to academic integrity related to manuscripts under review or published works.

Complaints must be submitted in writing through the journal’s official communication channels and, whenever possible, accompanied by evidence or information supporting the alleged facts.

The Editorial Technical Secretary of the journal shall serve as the first instance responsible for receiving, recording and processing complaints. Upon receipt of a complaint, a preliminary assessment of the reported facts shall be conducted in order to determine whether a formal investigation should be initiated.

The complainant shall provide the necessary evidence to support the allegation and enable the initiation of the corresponding investigation. All allegations shall be treated with due seriousness and respect and shall be followed through until the conclusion and resolution of the case.

When a complaint is deemed admissible, the Editor-in-Chief shall coordinate the corresponding investigation process, which may include requesting additional information, collecting and analysing evidence, conducting documentary reviews, consulting specialised sources, communicating with the parties involved and carrying out any other actions necessary to clarify the facts.

The Editor-in-Chief shall also be responsible for compiling the corresponding case file, including background information, evidence collected, actions undertaken and a technical report enabling the Journal Management Board to make an informed decision.

Throughout the investigation, the principles of confidentiality, impartiality, presumption of good faith, due process and the right to be heard shall be guaranteed.

Once the case file has been completed, it shall be submitted to the Journal Management Board, which shall analyse the case and issue the appropriate resolution. Such measures may include, among others, continuation or suspension of the editorial process, correction of the academic record, retraction of publications, rejection of manuscripts or any other action deemed appropriate according to the seriousness of the case.

Where necessary, the journal may seek the intervention, advice or collaboration of the affiliated institutions of authors, reviewers or editorial team members involved, as well as external specialists in research ethics and scholarly publishing.

All decisions adopted by the Journal Management Board shall be properly documented and incorporated into the corresponding case file in order to preserve the integrity, transparency and reliability of the editorial process.

3.2. Bodies Responsible for Resolving Disputes

Disputes arising from ethical breaches, editorial conflicts or alleged academic misconduct shall be analysed and resolved by the Journal Management Board on the basis of the available evidence, the principles of academic integrity and the journal’s editorial policies.

Where the complexity of a case requires it, the journal may seek expert advice from external specialists or request additional information from the affiliated institutions of the persons involved.

The intervention of university authorities shall only occur when the reported facts fall outside the editorial jurisdiction of the journal or involve possible administrative, employment-related or legal responsibilities that must be addressed by the competent authorities.

3.3. Assessment of Ethical Breaches and Corrective Measures

Possible breaches of editorial and academic ethics shall be assessed individually by the Journal Management Board, taking into consideration the nature of the facts, the available evidence, the degree of intent, the impact on the editorial process or scholarly record, any recurrence of misconduct and any other relevant circumstances.

Measures that may be adopted include, among others, requests for clarification, corrections or amendments to manuscripts, temporary suspension of the editorial process, rejection of submissions, retraction of previously published works or any other action proportionate to the seriousness of the case.

In all cases, the principles of impartiality, due process, confidentiality and the right to be heard shall be guaranteed.

4. CORRECTIVE ACTIONS AND EDITORIAL DECISIONS

Once the investigation and assessment process has been completed, the Journal Management Board may issue any decisions deemed necessary to preserve academic integrity, editorial transparency and the reliability of the scholarly record.

Depending on the nature and seriousness of the case, such measures may include:

  • Issuing recommendations or clarifications to the parties involved.
  • Requesting corrections, amendments or additional information.
  • Temporarily suspending the editorial process while an investigation is conducted.
  • Rejecting the manuscript under consideration.
  • Publishing corrections, errata or editorial notices.
  • Issuing expressions of concern regarding published works.
  • Retracting previously published articles in whole or in part.
  • Notifying the affiliated institutions of the persons involved when justified by the seriousness of the case.
  • Adopting any other editorial measure necessary to safeguard the principles of academic integrity and publication ethics.

All decisions shall be duly justified, documented and proportionate to the nature of the facts investigated.

5. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

Sincronía understands a conflict of interest to be any situation, relationship or circumstance that may influence, or be perceived as influencing, the objectivity, impartiality or independence of editorial decisions, scholarly evaluations or research outcomes.

Authors shall promptly disclose any personal, academic, institutional, professional, political or financial relationship that may give rise to a conflict of interest concerning the submitted work.

Reviewers shall decline participation in the peer-review process whenever circumstances may compromise their objectivity, including recent collaboration, employment dependency, family relationships, direct academic competition or any other situation capable of affecting the impartiality of their assessment.

Members of the editorial team shall recuse themselves from handling, evaluating or making decisions regarding manuscripts in which they have any relationship that may create a real, potential or perceived conflict of interest.

Whenever a conflict of interest is identified during any stage of the editorial process, the journal shall adopt the necessary measures to ensure transparency, impartiality and integrity in both the evaluation process and the corresponding editorial decision.

6. CORRECTIONS, RETRACTIONS AND EXPRESSIONS OF CONCERN

Argos Journal recognises that scholarly publishing constitutes a permanent record of academic knowledge and therefore seeks to preserve its integrity, accuracy and reliability.

When errors are identified that do not substantially affect the results, interpretations or conclusions of a publication, the journal may issue corrections or errata, which shall be linked to the original document in order to ensure transparency within the scholarly record.

Where evidence exists of plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, inappropriate manipulation of results, fraudulent authorship or other conduct compromising the academic validity of a published work, the journal may retract the article and clearly communicate the reasons underlying such decision.

In cases where reasonable concerns exist regarding potential irregularities but the corresponding investigation has not yet been concluded, the journal may issue an Expression of Concern in order to inform the academic community that a review process is ongoing.

All decisions relating to corrections, retractions or expressions of concern shall be adopted by the editorial team through transparent, impartial and properly documented procedures.

(Document prepared by: Lic. Nicolás Medina García)