Declaración ética sobre publicación y buenas prácticas

 

The International Journal of Communication History declares its commitment to the ethical standards of publication that ensure the proper development of research and its institutions. This ethical commitment must be upheld by all parties involved in the publication process, from the editorial board to the authors and reviewers.

The criteria for the positive evaluation of article proposals are based solely on originality, relevance, clarity, and appropriateness. An author’s academic status will not be a requirement for the publication of an article in any issue of the journal (i.e., holding a PhD is not necessary to publish in the journal).

The entire evaluation and review process will be anonymous. Authors must prepare the original file ensuring anonymity (see the author guidelines section). Reviewers must reject the submission if they can identify the authorship of the article based on its content. The Editorial Board will take into account any potential connections between the author and reviewers when assigning evaluations. Likewise, confidentiality and anonymity will be maintained throughout the entire evaluation process, including any clarifications or complaints that may arise from it.

RiHC condemns plagiarism and will remove or decline to publish any work found to have engaged in this malpractice. Authors must guarantee that their work is original and does not infringe upon the copyrights of third parties. Reviewers must notify the Editorial Board of any suspicion of plagiarism in the manuscripts they review.

In cases of shared authorship, all authors must confirm that the article’s content has been jointly agreed upon. Articles submitted for consideration must not have been previously presented or published in any other dissemination outlet.

Authors commit to verifying the data obtained or cited, ensuring it is not distorted or falsified to confirm the article’s initial hypotheses. They are also expected to consult the most current and relevant materials related to the article’s subject. All individuals who have made significant contributions to the conceptual design, planning, interpretation of results, and writing of the article must be included as authors. The order of authors should reflect the degree of participation. The content of each article is the sole responsibility of its authors.

Reviewers will critically and honestly evaluate the articles assigned to them. They must notify the Editorial Board if they are not qualified to conduct the review or if they have any conflict of interest with any element of the article. Reviewers must complete a detailed report explaining their evaluation and justifying their recommendation, particularly in the case of rejection. RiHC provides reviewers with a template containing relevant questions to assist in the review process, with space to include additional remarks if necessary.

If reviewers determine that the article is publishable with modifications, authors must make the necessary changes for the final publication. Authors will be informed anonymously of the outcome of the review along with the reviewers’ reports, regardless of the final decision. Once the revised article is received, the Editorial Board will decide whether or not to publish it based on the degree to which the suggested changes have been implemented.

If authors identify an error in their published article, they must notify the editors so that corrections can be made and published appropriately, following the journal's editorial guidelines.

In addition to the above, RiHC adheres to the Code of Ethics and Best Practices established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) for journal editors. In cases of conflict of interest, COPE’s flowcharts will be followed. (https://publicationethics.org/core-practices).