Ethical Statement

              Contextos publishes original articles under the highest international standards of quality and ethics. These principles are reflected in each stage of the publication process (submission, review, acceptance, editing, and dissemination). They are mandatory for all individuals involved with the journal (Editorial Committee, Editorial Board, the research and reviewer community).

              Within this framework, it is essential to note that Contextos is governed, first and foremost, by the principles of integrity in scientific research as outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Likewise, to promote an ethical model for its scientific work, the journal considers it appropriate to take into account the contents of public documents issued by the conventions of The World Conferences on Research Integrity (Singapore Statement, 2010; Montreal Statement, 2013; Amsterdam Agenda, 2017; Honk Kong Principles, 2019; Cape Town Statement, 2022).

Additionally, the ethical standards of Contextos are aligned with the principles outlined in the Research, Creation, and Innovation Policy of UMCE, as established in Exempt Resolution No. 2024-00-1246. These principles are:

1. A) Gender Equity
2. B) Inclusion, Diversity, and Interculturality
3. C) Scientific Ethics
4. D) Integrity and Good Practices
5. E) Sustainability and Environmental Responsibility
6. F) Partnership and Collaboration
7. G) Dissemination and Knowledge Transfer

Finally, it is worth noting that, to emphasize the importance of acquiring and disseminating knowledge through open-access academic platforms, Contextos adheres to the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI), a proposal presented at the Open Society Foundations (OSF) meeting in 2001.

Guidelines for Authors Submitting Texts

1. Plagiarism and Unacceptable Practices

Authors of the journal must be aware that Contextos strictly prohibits any form of plagiarism. To safeguard against this violation of scientific integrity, the Editorial Committee, particularly the Editorial Team, submits all received manuscripts to Turnitin Originality software—before they are sent for blind peer review—which detects whether the works have been previously published, copied, or modified. If the submitted text exceeds 25% similarity with another published work, it will be immediately rejected without proceeding to the following evaluation stage.

If the Editorial Team discovers that the manuscript does not meet the Ethical Standards outlined in this statement, a process will be initiated, which includes the following steps:

• Communication with the author(s): The author(s) will be contacted to inform them that, after a review process using Turnitin software, there are reasonable suspicions of plagiarism in their research or that it has been confirmed to engage in practices prohibited by the journal’s ethical guidelines.
• Report Preparation: A document outlining the review process with the plagiarism detection software will be prepared to support the suspicions of such practices and will be sent to the author(s).
• Rejection and Sanction: Along with the report, the author(s) will be informed that their research has been rejected, removed from the journal’s database, and, as a final sanction, they will be prohibited from submitting manuscripts to the same platform for a period no less than two years (four issues of the journal).

Additionally, Contextos reserves the right to inform the institution sponsoring the research, a decision that will be made solely by the Journal Director.

1.1 Statement of Originality and Transfer of Rights

Authors must clearly assert that their research does not involve questionable practices such as falsification, fabrication, or manipulation of data, improper authorship, conflicts of interest, salami slicing, etc., all of which are strictly prohibited in this statement.

Additionally, in the case of articles with multiple authors, each author will be required to detail their specific contribution to the research work.

 1.2 Research Data and Intellectual Property Rights

If the methodology of an article involves the participation of human beings and the collection of private data, authors must take into account the Guidelines for the Ethical Evaluation of Research in Social Sciences and Humanities with and about People (ANID), as well as the content of Law No. 19628 on the Protection of Private Life. In this case, authors are requested to attach the document certifying the approval of an Ethical Scientific Committee from the institution sponsoring the research.

1.3 Regarding Reviewer Suggestions

Authors may suggest names of specialists with whom they have no conflicts of interest (in particular, no employment or contractual relationship) following a formal request from the journal sent via institutional email. This does not imply in any case that these individuals will necessarily review the article.

1.4 Artificial Intelligence

In the current context, where artificial intelligence is understood as a technological tool that facilitates the acquisition and dissemination of knowledge worldwide, Contextos utilizes generative AI policies for journals as a reference to strengthen and promote the scientific integrity of its research in this area. In this regard, it is essential to keep in mind that:

When authors use generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process, they should only use them to improve the readability and language of the work. Applying these technologies should be done with human oversight and control, and authors should carefully review and edit the results, as AI can generate authoritative-sounding output that may be incorrect, incomplete, or biased. The authors are ultimately responsible and accountable for the contents of the work. (párr 5)

 

1.5 ORCID

Those submitting their contributions to the journal must provide their Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCID) to ensure that their research can be easily found in the databases where the journal is indexed. In the case of not having this alphanumeric code, authors can obtain it for free at https://orcid.org/.

 

Actions of the Editorial Team

The Editorial Team, part of the Contextos Editorial Committee, comprises professionals with extensive experience in the fields of editing and publishing scientific research. Within this framework, and to comply with international standards of integrity in editorial processes, they are guided by the Publishing Ethics Resource Kit for Editors (PERK) by Elsevier. Among its responsibilities are the following:

• To ensure that the submitted contributions explicitly address topics related to the disciplines stated in the journal’s presentation section.
• To carry out a preliminary review of the article, verifying that all the guidelines established in the Guidelines for Authors are fully met, thus ensuring that the submission qualifies as a scientifically rigorous research work. This step allows the research to proceed to the peer-review stage.
• To search for and contact specialists external to UMCE with specific expertise in the area of knowledge relevant to each submission.
• To maintain constant communication with the authors in order to keep them informed in a timely manner about the processes and deadlines related to the publication of their work. A minimum of three months will be considered for the reviewer search and evaluation process, two months for editing, style correction, and layout, and one month for the publication of the article.
• To ensure that the contributions meet the standards of international indexing systems (with a greater proportion of external institutional authorship than internal).
• To establish and continually renew a network of reviewers external to UMCE and to maintain an annual record of them in order to expand the journal's pool of collaborators.
• To draft and send, within no more than one month, an Academic Review Certificate to each reviewer who has completed their evaluation in order to acknowledge their work officially.
• To propose dissemination initiatives for the research published in the journal, for example, by creating accounts on various digital platforms or organizing academic events to present new issues and invite some authors to share their work. The goal of these actions is to establish a community around the journal and promote its dissemination both nationally and internationally.
• To decide on the relevance of publishing issues on specific topics or dossiers.
• To continuously assess the journal’s shortcomings and promote progress in terms of indexation.

 

About the Reviewers:

1. The reviewer community of Contextos is composed of professionals who are specialists in the specific field of each discipline mentioned in the journal’s presentation.
2. The selection of reviewers is based on two fundamental principles: A) demonstrable knowledge and experience in the specific area of the research, and B) institutional affiliation (the proportion of professionals performing these functions affiliated with the Metropolitan University of Educational Sciences must be smaller than that of professionals from other universities). About the selection of reviewers, Contextos also considers it important to include international reviewers to enhance the portal's international ties and the assignment of specialists, following a gender parity criterion (whenever circumstances permit).
3. Each submission received will be reviewed by two specialists (double-blind peer review) who will receive the anonymized manuscript.
4. The evaluation of articles for Contextos constitutes an intellectual endeavor carried out individually and voluntarily (ad honorem).
5. The content of the reviewed research is completely confidential and, therefore, may not be discussed with or presented to third parties. This policy includes the abstract, research objectives, proposed hypothesis, and bibliographic sources used, among other details.
6. The assignment of reviewers and the submission of manuscripts is conducted directly through the journal's Open Journal System (OJS). However, in specific cases, the Editorial Team may contact a reviewer before the official assignment to confirm their availability to conduct the review.
7. The review period for each article is four weeks.
8. Reviewers must promptly report if they observe or suspect any unethical practices in the reviewed research.
9. Comments or observations on the research must always be made constructively and by the corresponding review guidelines.
10. Reviewers must be aware that if there is a discrepancy between two evaluations of an article, the Editorial Team has the authority to appoint a third reviewer to obtain a final judgment.