Editorial ethical guidelines

The Revista de Derecho abides by:

Accordingly, these sources are part of the norms of the Revista de Derecho. However, we have also drawn up the following ethical guidelines:


Ethical guidelines for authors

  1. Originality, intellectual property (plagiarism) and veracity. Authors must ensure that their work is original. Also, if they have used parts of a work and/or words written by other authors, they must cite them or reference them appropriately, avoiding plagiarism and respecting other intellectual property regulations. Authors also undertake to present accurate data that have not been falsified or manipulated. Revista de Derecho is particularly vigilant in identifying and sanctioning this type of behavior. To identify it, we will rely both on the reviews carried out by our reviewers as well as technological solutions, among other tools designed for this purpose. If a breach of these guidelines is detected, the authors will be contacted to inform them of the matter at fault and to request clarification. If the explanation given is not satisfactory, the manuscript will be withdrawn from the review, editing and editorial planning process. If an infringement of this type is confirmed in a research paper that has already been published, the work will be withdrawn and an explanation of this decision will be sent to the submiter. It will also be reported to the Ethics Committee of the authors’ institution.

  2. Data access and transparency. For the editorial review process, authors may be requested to allow us access to the raw data used in their research and they must, therefore, be prepared, if necessary, to provide public access to these records. We suggest that these data are attached in a file when submitting the manuscript, or in a link at the end of the paper's bibliography, under the title “tabulated data” or “datasets”.

  3. Multiple publication. An author must not publish two or more papers that describe the same investigation in the same way, whether this is in other languages or in more than one journal or other publications. This will be considered to be self-plagiarism. If this is identified during the review process, the authors will be contacted to request clarification of the matter. If the explanation given is not satisfactory, the manuscript will be withdrawn from the review, editing and editorial planning process. In the case of research that is already published, the work will be withdrawn. It will also be reported to the Ethics Committee of the authors’ institution.

  4. Fundamental errors in published papers. Should the authors/coauthors discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their own papers when they have already been published, they are obliged to notify the Revista de Derecho editor-in-chief immediately and provide all the information needed to withdraw or correct the texts.

  5. Debates following publication. When we receive a formal criticism of a published article, the original authors of the paper will be invited to write a response. Any criticisms must be reasonable and not contain any offensive or defamatory content. They must also include proof or data to support their claims. The criticism and response may be peer-reviewed. The procedure for resolving this type of debate will have a maximum duration of 90 days calculated from the date the criticism is received. If it is necessary to make corrections or rectification in the Revista as a result of this process, this must be done as quickly as possible.

  6. Ethical supervision and informed consent. When research involves individuals, researchers must include this information in the Methodology section, and explicitly state that they have the approval of the Ethics Committee of the institution to which they belong. They must also indicate that the participants or their legal representatives have signed an informed consent form. The inclusion of photographs, videos or audios involving underaged participants will not be allowed, unless the authors demonstrate that they are essential to understand the research and they have the pertinent authorizations. Images, videos and audios must be managed to ensure and safeguard the privacy of the persons appearing in them. Any papers that do not explicitly include this information will not be submitted to peer review. 

  7. Conflicts of interest. Authors must explicitly inform the editor-in-chief of any conflict of interest that may have influenced the results obtained or the interpretations proposed in the work. They must also state that they have not received any financing from the agencies and/or projects from where the manuscript was developed. If any undeclared conflict of interest is identified during the review process, the authors will be contacted to request clarification. If the explanation given is not satisfactory, the manuscript will be withdrawn from the review, editing and editorial planning process. In the case of research that is already published, the work will be withdrawn from the Revista. It will also be reported to the Ethics Committee of the authors’ institution.

  8. Authorship and contribution criteria. Following the norms and standards established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), an author is the person who has actively participated in preparing the manuscript. When a paper is produced by two or more authors, they must declare their contribution to production of the text in accordance with the CRediT taxonomy (https://credit.niso.org), which can be reviewed in the Authorship Section. Not all the concepts have to be used, only those that are necessary to understand the role played by each coauthor. For example: Andrade: conceptualization, investigation and writing; Fernández: validation; Valdés: review and editing. The first author is the person who has made the most significant contribution to the work. Those who have provided data, worked on correcting the style of the manuscript, among others, can be listed in the “Acknowledgments” section of the paper.


Ethical guidelines for reviewers

  1. Contribution to the editorial decision and objectivity. Reviewers undertake to review the manuscripts in their area of knowledge, critically, objectively and constructively, in such a way that their review provides support to the editors when making their decisions on the proposed papers and helps the authors to improve their contributions. In this context, reviewers also agree to give clear information on any bibliographical references to significant works that the author may have forgotten to include. Reviewers must give sufficient reasons for their reviews, both in the case when recommending the paper's approval and its rejection.

  2. Information obtained during the peer review process must be confidential. Manuscripts must not be discussed with other people without the express consent of the editors.

  3. Reviewers agree to issue their review as quickly as possible. If they are not able to deliver their decision within the period of time requested, they must inform the editors immediately.

  4. Respect for the plagiarism policy. Reviewers must inform the editors of any similarity between the manuscript they are reviewing and other published works.

  5. Conflicting and competing interests. Information obtained during the review process may not be used for personal purposes.

 

Ethical guidelines for editors 

  1. Selection of reviewers. We will seek to select reviewers who are sufficiently qualified to issue an expert opinion on the paper, with as little bias as possible.

  2. Scientific merit. Manuscripts will be assessed considering the scientific merit of their content, with no discrimination on grounds of the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, ethnic origin, nationality or political opinion.

  3. Revista de Derecho’s editorial team members must observe total confidentiality in relation to papers that have not been published.

  4. Respect for deadlines. The editorial team undertakes to work to meet the deadlines set for review and publication of the papers accepted to ensure a rapid dissemination of their results.

  5. Academic endogamy. Revista de Derecho can allocate up to 20% of each issue to papers written by academics from Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso. This percentage will be calculated considering all sections of the Journal and, when this threshold is reached, any remaining manuscripts will be included in the following issues, in chronological order based on the date of their approval.

  6. Conflicting and competing interests. Revista de Derecho’s editorial team undertakes not to use in their own research any content of the manuscripts submitted for publication without first obtaining written consent from the author.