Publication Ethics
The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal is a crucial task for the dissemination of knowledge and contributes to scientific development. As a peer-reviewed journal, the rigor of scientific publication is expected to be observed in the evaluation process of submitted papers. Therefore, ethical behavior is expected from all parties involved during the publication process: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, and the publisher.
Universidad César Vallejo journals are responsible for ensuring that submitted articles are evaluated and published based on their merits for publication. We ensure that, at every step of the paper publication process, appropriate practices in publication science are considered.
Psiquemag Journal assumes the COPE code of conduct for editors and the "Principles of Transparency and Good Practices in Academic Publications" (Publications Ethics Committee), as well as the recommendations of the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA) and the "SciELO Guide of Good Practices for Strengthening Ethics in Scientific Publishing".
Responsibilities of Authors
Submission Guidelines
Authors of original empirical articles must present an accurate description of the procedures performed and the intentions for deliberately carrying out such work. All data should be explicitly stated in the article along with their specific details and sources to ensure that replication can be carried out in future research. Inaccurate or fraudulent descriptions/data stated in submitted research articles would enunciate ethical violations, as it is not an acceptable practice in scientific publications.
Originality and plagiarism
Authors or contributors are required to properly cite and collate the literature sources they used to formulate their research articles. Plagiarism can manifest itself in various forms, such as using the work of another as one's own, intentionally or unintentionally copying or paraphrasing parts of another's work without citation and claiming results of research conducted by others. Plagiarism is unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Redundant or simultaneous publication
Authors should generally not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously constitutes unethical publication behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit a previously published article for consideration in another journal.
Acknowledgment of sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others should always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the work reported. Information obtained in private, such as in conversations, correspondence, or discussions with others, should not be used or reported without explicit written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as manuscript review or grant applications, should not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.
Authorship of the paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. When others have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as collaborators. The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the article and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
All authors must disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantial conflicts of interest that could be interpreted to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest possible stage and should be disclosed to the editor in the cover letter when the manuscript is first submitted.
Fundamental errors in published work
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, the author must notify the journal editor or publisher immediately and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the article. Suppose the editor or publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error. In that case, the author must immediately retract or correct the article or provide evidence to the editor of the correction of the original article.
Editors' Responsibilities
Publication Decisions
The editor of a peer-reviewed journal is responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the research process in question and its importance to researchers and readers should always drive such decisions. The editor may be guided by the editorial policies of the journal's and be constrained by the legal requirements in effect at the time with respect to libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor's decisions are based on manuscript evaluation reports from external peer reviewers.
Transparent decisions
An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnicity, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors. Double-masked reviews will be conducted to ensure that there is no bias in the manuscript evaluation process. In this type of review, reviewers are not aware of the author's personal and professional profile, just as authors will not receive information about the reviewer's identity.
Confidentiality
The editor and any editorial staff should not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisors, and the editor, as appropriate.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript should not be used in an editor's research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or insights gained through peer review should be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Editors should excuse themselves (i.e., should ask a co-editor, associate editor, or other editorial board member to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected with the papers. Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant expertise and publish corrections if competent expertise is disclosed after publication. If necessary, other appropriate actions should be taken, such as publication of a retraction or expression of concern. It should be ensured that the peer review process for sponsored supplements is the same as that used for the main journal. Items in sponsored supplements should be accepted solely on the basis of scholarly merit and interest to readers and should not be influenced by commercial considerations.
Responsibilities of Reviewers
Contribution to editorial decisions
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with the author, may also assist the author in improving the article. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and is at the heart of the scientific method.
Speed
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or who knows that their prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse themself from the review process.
Confidentiality
Any manuscript received for review should be treated as a confidential document. They should not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
Standards of objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticisms by the author are inappropriate. Referees should express their opinions clearly with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has yet to be cited. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument has been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also bring to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published article of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript should not be used in a reviewer's research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or insights gained through peer review should be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected with the papers.
Procedures
The journals of Universidad César Vallejo are governed by the procedures proposed by the COPE Statement of Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice for Journal Editors: https://publicationethics.org/
Guidelines for behavioral projects with human participants
The APA Code of Ethics establishes strict guidelines to ensure that all psychological research is conducted ethically, responsibly, and respectful of the rights of participants. These policies are primarily detailed in Section 8: Research and Publication of the code. The main points are summarized below:
1. Informed Consent (8.02)
Psychologists must obtain informed consent from all participants before beginning research, except for exceptions approved by ethics committees (IRBs). This consent must include clear information about the study's purpose, duration, procedures, risks, benefits, confidentiality, and the option to withdraw at any time without penalty.
2. Use of Deception (8.07)
The use of deception techniques is permitted only if scientifically justified and there is no other alternative. Furthermore, they must not pose significant risks to participants. A subsequent debriefing process is required to explain the true nature of the study.
3. Protection from Harm (8.01)
Research must not cause physical or psychological harm to participants. Reasonable precautions must be taken to protect their well-being, dignity, and rights.
4. Risk and Benefit Assessment
Before initiating research, psychologists must carefully assess the balance between expected benefits and potential risks to participants.
5. Use of Animals in Research (8.09)
The use of animals must meet rigorous legal and ethical standards. Humane care, scientific justification, and supervision by trained personnel are required.
6. Confidentiality (8.04)
The identity and private information of participants must be protected at all stages of the research, including the publication of results.
7. Publication and Plagiarism (8.10–8.11)
Psychologists must accurately report their data and results, without falsification or fabrication. Plagiarism is strictly prohibited. Furthermore, authorship credit should only be given to those who have significantly contributed to the design, execution, or analysis of the research.
8. Compensation (8.06)
Participants must receive fair compensation when appropriate, but never conditional on completion of the study.
9. Data Storage and Access (8.14)
Researchers must retain data for a reasonable period (usually five years) and provide access to other scientists if required for verification, while respecting confidentiality.
