Code of ethics

RELATEC as an international scientific journal adheres to the ethical standards, principles of transparency and good practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

The direction of the "Latin American Journal of Educational Technology" (RELATEC) is not responsible for the opinions, analyzes or results collected by the authors in their articles.

Editorial process

RELATEC is a scientific journal that adopts editorial independence as a basic principle and, consequently, does not accept financial subsidies from public or private funds on a permanent basis. The criteria for publication are always of a scientific nature, with no other financial, business or political interests or commitments. Likewise, RELATEC does not accept the participation of pressure groups or scientific collectives with specific interests in its editorial work.
The editorial process is not discriminatory with regard to the individual characteristics or identity of authors and reviewers. RELATEC is a scientific journal that promotes inclusiveness and equity in all its activities.
The Editorial Board rejects any inappropriate or abusive behaviour or communication towards authors, reviewers or editors of RELATEC. In the event of such behaviour, the Editorial Board will take appropriate decisions for the protection of the individuals involved. Consequences may include, for example, the withdrawal of an original or the cancellation of the content of a review.

Authorship and co-authorship

The following principles should be considered with regard to the inclusion and priority of authorship:

1. Making a significant contribution in the conception of the idea, in the process of analysis or in the interpretation of the research results.
2. Participate in the drafting of the original or carry out the critical review during its elaboration.
3. Approve the final version of the first submission and, where appropriate, the final version for publication.
4. To inform of the participation through the Cover Letter that is sent together with the original in the RELATEC submission process.

RELATEC assumes the orientations and guidelines offered by COPE to solve possible problems with authorship, such as addition or deletion of an author, among others (https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2018.1.1). To avoid these problems, the following guidelines should be followed:
• Authors should agree on authorship when planning the research, establish authorship in writing, and revise the agreement through the stages of the research. Disagreements should be resolved as they occur, based on facts and criteria.
• The order of authorship should be decided jointly among the authors and the reasons behind the order of authorship should be made explicit to the editor. Authors should describe each author's contribution to the research.
• All authors should be identified. Individuals should not be added as authors if they have not contributed significantly to the research. Acknowledgements may be acceptable when contributions do not constitute authorship.

Plagiarism

Plagiarism is "the use of ideas, concepts, words or structures without proper acknowledgement of the source to benefit in a context where originality is expected" (Gipp, 2014, p.11).
Gipp, B. (2014). Citation-based Plagiarism Detection. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-06394-8)

Academic plagiarism is a form of misuse of information, simplified by the abundance of information and ease of access. Although academic texts contain original elements, they are not an exercise in creative writing. The original contribution must be contextualised in the existing literature of the subject area. Academic writing has multiple voices: that of the author along with that of other authors from cited sources. The reader must be able to differentiate which is the author's original contribution and must be able to access all the sources used in the text.
Plagiarism deprives original authors of the benefits of their work, including their academic reputation or access to research funding. Plagiarism distorts the traceability of ideas, arguments and results within the academic literature and hides resources of interest for the reader to discover other sources of information.
«Verbatim plagiarism» describes an improper copying of text with little or no disguise. «Copy and paste» is the most common form of verbatim plagiarism and is characterised by adopting verbatim text from another source as one's own. «Mix and match» refers to the copying and merging of text segments with minor adjustments to form a coherent text (e.g. changing word order, replacing words with synonyms or deleting «filler» words).
«Disguised plagiarism» includes practices to conceal improper copying of a text. «Paraphrasing» is the intentional rewriting in vocabulary and style, by the plagiariser, of another's text without acknowledging the source. «Plagiarism by translation» is the manual or automated conversion of a text from one language to another with the intention of concealing its origin. «Structural plagiarism» includes the use of elements such as specific research approaches or lines of argument very similar to those of other authors, without explicit acknowledgement. And «self-plagiarism» consists of the partial or complete use of one's own texts without their reuse being justified.
RELATEC publishes original research, which offers new contributions to scientific knowledge. It promotes the dissemination of relevant studies in Educational Technology research. RELATEC does not admit plagiarism rates in submissions and uses anti-plagiarism software to avoid this malpractice. Originals in which plagiarism rates are detected are rejected, with no possibility of resubmission. The decision is supported by the plagiarism report attached to the communication with the authors.
Editors and reviewers can communicate any suspicion of plagiarism which will be analysed by the RELATEC editorial board, according to COPE guidelines.

Duplicity and redundant publications

Duplication refers to the practice of submitting the same study to two or more journals or publishing more or less the same study in two or more journals.
Redundant publication refers to the situation where a study is divided into several parts and submitted to two or more journals. Or findings have been previously published elsewhere without proper cross-referencing, permission or justification.
Translations of articles without proper permission or notification and reposting of previously published open access articles are considered duplication.
«Self-plagiarism» is considered a form of redundant publication. It is the recycling or borrowing of content from previous works without citation. This practice is widespread and may be unintentional. Transparency on the part of the author about the use of previously published work usually provides the necessary information to assess whether it is deliberate or not.
RELATEC follows the protocol recommended by COPE for cases of suspected duplicate or redundant publication, both in a submitted manuscript (https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.2.12) and in a published article (https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.2.13).
RELATEC does not admit duplicity or redundancy, unless the editorial board considers that the manuscript deepens and increases scientific knowledge, that it has the approval of the publisher containing the original publication and that the citation to the original source is included.
Readers and reviewers can raise any suspicion of duplicate or redundant publication through the RELATEC General Editor (relatec@unex.es).
Submissions submitted to RELATEC must not be under consideration, under review, have been accepted, or be published in an «OnlineFirs»" version in another journal or publisher. Publications that are deposited as «preprints» on an author's personal website or in the author's linked institutional repository will not be considered duplicate or redundant publications.
Manuscripts derived from a doctoral thesis should be submitted according to the RELATEC author guidelines. To avoid «self-plagiarism» authors must correctly reference adapted extracts from the thesis. In case the thesis has been published by a publisher and is publicly available, permission from the publisher may be required for submission to RELATEC. This information must be communicated through the «Comments to the Editor» space in the RELATEC OJS platform. Likewise, RELATEC authors who wish to include their publications in their thesis must notify the journal in advance of the thesis defence.

Research involving human subjects

Research involving human subjects must be approved by an Ethics Committee in accordance with international legal standards for research.
RELATEC recommends that its authors follow the guidelines developed by BERA - British Educational Research Association in its «Ethical Guidance for Educational Research» (https://www.bera.ac.uk/publication/ethical-guidelines-for-educational-research-2018-online) regarding consent, transparency, right to withdraw, incentives, harms of research participation, privacy and data storage and disclosure of information.
Voluntary and ongoing informed consent is the condition by which participants understand and agree to their participation, as well as the terms and practicalities of participation, without any coercion, before the research begins. Researchers should make every effort to ensure that all potential participants understand, as well as they can, what is involved in a study. Researchers will take into account the rights and duties of those who have legal responsibility for minors, such as those acting in a custodial capacity (e.g. families) or as 'responsible others' (i.e. those who are responsible for the welfare of participants, such as social workers/educators). This may involve obtaining consent from those responsible for children, such as families or guardians.

Data protection

RELATEC is governed by the provisions of the Spanish Organic Law 3/2018 of 5 December on the Protection of Personal Data and Guarantee of Digital Rights (https://www.boe.es/eli/es/lo/2018/12/05/3/con), and the Regulation (European Union) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the European Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (https://www.boe.es/doue/2016/119/L00001-00088.pdf).

Competing interests

A competing interest exists when a researcher, author, editor or reviewer has a financial/personal interest or belief that could affect their objectivity or inappropriately influence their actions. Undeclared financial interests can seriously undermine the credibility of the journal, authors and educational research. Similarly, there may be competing interests arising from personal relationships, academic competence or intellectual positioning. In assessing the potential conflict, consideration should be given to whether the author's association with the organisation prevents the development of unbiased research or whether the relationship, when subsequently revealed, causes the reader to feel misled or confused.
Explicit disclosure of a relationship that may constitute a competing interest, even if the author does not believe it affects their research, should be reported to the RELATEC editor through the Cover Letter. However, anyone who identifies undisclosed competing interests in an article published in RELATEC may report it to the General Editor (relatec@unex.es ) ho will bring it to the attention of the Editorial Board. RELATEC follows the COPE guidelines on undisclosed conflict of interest in a submitted manuscript (https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.2.7).

Retractions

RELATEC will retract a published article in the following cases:

a) Clear evidence is obtained that the results are unreliable, due to major errors in the conduct of research or invention (e.g. artificial construction of data) or falsification (e.g. manipulation of images).
b) There is evidence of plagiarism.
c) Results have been previously published elsewhere without proper attribution to previous sources, permission to republish or justification (i.e. cases of redundant publication).
d) The article contains resources or data without permission to use.
e) Copyright has been infringed or there is some other serious legal problem (e.g. defamation, privacy).
f) It has been published as a result of a subjective or manipulated peer review process.
g) The author(s) did not disclose competing interests (also known as conflict of interest) that, in the opinion of the editor, unduly affect the interpretations of the work or the recommendations of the editors and reviewers.

RELATEC follows the COPE retraction guidelines (https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.4).

Transparency of data and evidence

RELATEC promotes Open Science and consequently requests authors to keep complete records of their research data, so that verification and reproduction of their results is possible in the case of a reasoned request. RELATEC recommends authors to use open repositories for the deposit of this evidence (e.g. Zenodo) in order to make it accessible to third parties. In the initial phase of manuscript submission, data should be anonymised for a correct development of the blind peer review.

Record integrity

RELATEC keeps documentary records of published manuscripts (metadata), hosted in different international portals (DOAJ, DIALNET, DEHESA, among others). In addition, RELATEC has an internal registration system for the correspondence of all manuscripts received (rejected, rejected, accepted and published) with complete history in the Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform. Although it is confidential internal information, this data may be consulted in case of conflict of interest, problems related to academic integrity, or in compliance with current legal processes.

Authors' Commitments

Originality: Authors of manuscripts submitted to RELATEC assure that their work is unpublished, that it does not include unidentified content from other authors or fragments of previous publications by the authors themselves. Moreover, they confirm the veracity of the data used in their research. Authors must not use the same contribution in more than one scientific journal. 

Sources: Authors must include in their citations and references a correct communication of all their bibliographical and documentary sources.

Authorship: authors undertake to include the persons who have contributed significantly to the design (conceptualisation, methodology) and conduct of the research (analysis and interpretation of the results, conclusions), including the writing of the article. The order among the authors establishes the level of responsibility and involvement in the paper.

Conflict of interest: Authors must explicitly declare that there are no conflicts of interest that could influence the results and conclusions of the research. They must also disclose any external funding linked to the research article.

Open science: authors should consider sharing their "open data" as far as possible through public repositories (e.g. Zenodo). Reasons for openness of research data include: (a) avoiding unnecessary duplication in data collection; (b) enabling validation of research results; (c) promoting collaboration and innovation in research; and (d) gaining greater visibility and impact of research results.

Reviewer commitments

Editorial decision support: Reviewers are committed to making a rigorous, honest, constructive and unbiased assessment of the scientific and literary quality of the original, based on their knowledge of Educational Technology.

Diligence: The reviewers undertake to evaluate the work in the shortest possible time in order to respect the deadlines set by RELATEC.

Confidentiality: Assigned originals must not be shared with others without the express consent of the editors.

Rigour: Reviewers are obliged to justify all their assessments. They must not make any personal judgements about the authors. Reviewers will submit a report according to the RELATEC evaluation guidelines. They are obliged to warn the editors if substantial parts of the manuscript have already been published or are under review for another publication.

Conflict of interest: information obtained during the peer review process must be considered confidential and may not be used for personal purposes Reviewers only review an original if there is no conflict of interest.

Commitment of the editors

Review process: the editors will ensure the selection of the most qualified reviewers to provide a critical and expert assessment of the work, with as little bias as possible. 

Non-discrimination: the editors evaluate the articles submitted for publication based exclusively on the scientific value of the contents.

Anonymity: The editors undertake to ensure the confidentiality of the originals received, their authors and reviewers involved in their evaluation, so that anonymity preserves the intellectual integrity of the entire process.

Respect for deadlines: the editors must ensure that the time limits established for reviews and the publication of accepted articles are complied with.