Principios Éticos
Ethical guidelines for publication in the journal
The publication of an article previously reviewed by the peers of Sin Fundamento is an essential element in the development of a coherent and respectful network regarding knowledge. This directly reflects the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Therefore, it is important to agree on the standards of ethical behavior that all parties involved in the process of each scientific publication must have, such as: the author, the editor of the journal, the peer reviewers, the publisher and society.
The Faculty of Philosophy and Human Sciences of the Universidad Libre, as editor of the Journal Sin Fundamento, aware of its duties at all stages of a serious publication, declares the recognition of its own ethical responsibilities and those of its peers. The Universidad Libre is committed to ensuring that advertising, reprinting or other commercial income does not impact or influence editorial decisions. In addition, the Editorial of the Universidad Libre and the Editorial Board of the journal rely on communication with other journals or editors, whenever it is useful and necessary.
Duties of Authors
Reporting Standards
Authors of original research articles should give an accurate account of the work they have undertaken, as well as an objective discussion of its significance. The underlying data should be accurately represented in the paper. Articles should be clear, detailed and have references that allow others to replicate the work. Fraudulent statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable. Review articles and other professional publications should also be accurate and objective, and editorial opinion pieces should be clearly identified as such.
Data Retention and Access
Authors are encouraged to provide the original data in a paper for editorial review, and should facilitate public access to such data, or ensure that the data is available after publication.
Originality and Plagiarism
Authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works; if authors have used the work or words of others, or both, they should ensure that these have been properly cited. Plagiarism takes many forms, from passing off another author's paper as one's own, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution), to claiming the results of another's research as one's own. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical behavior, which is unacceptable in scientific publications.
Concurrent, multiple, or redundant publication
In general, an author should not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research published in more than one primary journal or publication. Submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal constitutes both unethical behavior and its publication is unacceptable. In general, an author should not submit a previously published article for consideration by another journal. Publication of some types of articles (e.g., methodological guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is justifiable in some cases provided specific conditions are met. Authors and editors of the journals involved must agree to secondary publication, which should reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.
Authorship of the document
Authorship of the document should be limited to a maximum of three, who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution or interpretation of the article. If there are other professionals who have participated in substantive aspects of the research project, they must be acknowledged and listed as contributors. The main author must ensure that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the final version of the document, unanimously agreeing to its submission for publication.
Fundamental errors in published works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his or her published article, it is his or her obligation to immediately notify the Editor of the journal or the Editorial Board and cooperate with the Editor to withdraw or correct the document. If the Editor learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the Editor's obligation to promptly correct the article and provide evidence to the author of the correction of the original document.
Duties of the Editorial Board
Publication Decisions
The Editor of the Journal of Sin Fundamento and the Editorial Board are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The approval of the work in question and its importance for researchers and readers are part of these decisions. The Editor is guided by the policies of the Editorial Board of the journal, adhering to the current legal aspects regarding defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Editor may seek the support of other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
The Editor must evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, nationality, or political philosophy of the authors.
Confidentiality
The Editor and any editorial team must not reveal any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the authors, reviewers, potential reviewers, other corresponding editorial advisors, and the editor, if appropriate.
Duties of reviewers
Contribution to editorial decisions
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through communications with the author can also help the editor improve the writing and quality of the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and is at the heart of the scientific method. Sin Fundamento shares the view that researchers who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to participate fairly in peer review processes.
Punctuality
Any selected reviewer who does not feel qualified to review the article must promptly inform the editor that it is impossible for him or her to carry out his or her review by communicating his or her decision to the editor.
Confidentiality
All manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be presented or discussed with third parties, except as authorized by the editor.
Standards of objectivity
Comments must be made objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers must express their views clearly, supported by arguments.
Appropriate Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published works that have not been cited by the authors. Any previously recorded statement, observation, derivation, or argument should be accompanied by appropriate citation. A reviewer should also call the editor's attention to any substantial or partial similarity between the manuscript under consideration and any other published document of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in an article submitted in the selection process should not be used in the reviewers' own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review should be kept confidential and will not be used for personal gain. Reviewers should not evaluate articles in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions related to the texts being evaluated.