Code of conduct and best practices

CODE OF CONDUCT AND BEST PRACTICE

Runa, archivo para las ciencias del hombre adheres to the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and Code of Conduct for Journals Publishers established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). In compliance with this code, the journal will ensure the scientific quality of the publications and the appropriate response to the needs of readers and authors. The code is addressed to the editorial team, authors and reviewers. Papers that do not comply with these ethical standards will be discarded.

1. Publication and authorship
Papers submitted to the Journal must contain a detailed description of the procedures followed. They must not contain false or distorted claims, which constitutes unethical behaviour.
Any idea or result described in a manuscript submitted to the Journal, which belongs to someone who is not a co-author on it, or which has been previously published, must be appropriately referenced.
All manuscripts should include relevant information about the sources of funding for the study on the cover page. Likewise, at the end of the manuscript, authors should include a list of conflicts of interest that apply to the submitted work.
It is the authors' responsibility to verify that the content of the manuscript is absolutely original, and that any fragments or ideas that are not original are cited in the text.
Authors should not publish an article containing essentially the same results in more than one journal. This behaviour is unacceptable to the Editorial Board.
Authorship on a manuscript must be the result of substantial contributions to the conception, development and/or writing of the manuscript. All persons who have made substantial contributions should be listed as authors, and those who have not made such contributions should not be listed as authors. The corresponding author must verify that the authorship criteria are met.
All persons listed as authors must have known, studied and approved the content of the article before it is submitted for publication. Checking this process is also the responsibility of the corresponding author.

2. Authors' responsibilities:
Authors must be actively involved in the peer review process, and must provide timely and truthful information requested by the reviewers or by the Editorial Board of the Journal.
It is the responsibility of the authors, in particular the corresponding author, to verify that all authors approve the content of the manuscript, and that all persons who have made significant contributions are listed as authors.
If an article is published with numerical, conceptual, spelling or typographical errors, and one of the authors notices this, it is his/her responsibility to immediately alert the Editorial Committee to proceed immediately to correct or retract the article.

3. Peer/reviewer responsibilities:
The reviewers' concepts must be objective, fair, and formulated in a respectful and constructive tone. Reviewers' opinions should be free of personal opinions or value judgements. If the reviewer does not consider him or herself sufficiently expert or qualified to review an article, this should be stated after reading the abstract of the article, before the full article is sent to the reviewer.
Reviewers must be free of any conflict of interest related to the authors, the work or its funders that might bias their decision to accept or reject a particular manuscript, and if they have an insurmountable impediment, they must declare it before the Editorial Board sends them the full text of the manuscript.
It is the reviewers' responsibility to bring to the attention of the authors relevant references that they have not included in their work. It is also the reviewer's responsibility to alert the Editorial Board to an episode of double publication that has not been noticed by the Journal.
The handling of papers submitted for review must be completely confidential, and must not be shared with anyone.

4. Responsibilities of the Editors:
The decision of acceptance, rejection or conditional acceptance is the absolute sovereignty of the Editorial Board, based on its judgement of the feasibility, originality and contribution of the work.
The Editorial Board must treat all submitting authors fairly and equally, following without distinction as to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, nationality, or political philosophy of the authors, the procedures described in this statement.
Editors must be free from any conflict of interest related to the authors, the work, or its funders that would bias their decision to accept or reject a particular manuscript, and if they have an insurmountable impediment, they must disclose it in a timely manner and withdraw from the evaluation of a particular work.
Where there are indications or suspicions of plagiarism, the Committee uses free plagiarism detection software: http://plagiarism-detect.com/.
Editorial Board members must not disclose to anyone the content of articles submitted for consideration for publication. The Committee also undertakes to follow procedures to ensure that the identity of reviewers remains anonymous throughout the review process.
If a member of the Editorial Committee notices errors or inaccuracies in articles that have already been published, it is his/her responsibility to inform the other members of the Committee, in order to proceed with a correction or retraction as appropriate.

5. Matters relating to Editorial Ethics
All members of the Editorial Board are responsible for ensuring that the rules and procedures contained in this statement are followed, and for alerting other members when deviations from them are occurring.
Authors wishing to retract an article should contact the Editorial Committee stating their wish and explaining the reasons for their request. Once the Editorial Committee has met and analysed the case, a clearly identifiable retraction note will be published in the table of contents and indexing services.
If financial, professional or trade interests of a member of the Editorial Board interfere with the independence of the Editorial Board in a particular case, the member must isolate himself/herself from that case.
The editors of the Journal will always be prepared to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions or apologies where necessary, even if there is a perception that publication would adversely affect the perception of the Journal.
The Editors and the Editorial Board are absolutely committed not to publish any work that has a component of plagiarism or fraud.