Ethics and Publication Practices

1. Good Publication Practice Guidelines

RCD observes good editorial practices and deontological standards for academic and scientific journal publishing according to national standards and accepted international protocols.

RCD adopts the blind peer review system using the Open Journal System for its entire editorial process and flows from reception to publication of its issues.

The blind peer review system is applied to all articles, without exception, and can be duly audited with the preservation of the corresponding confidentiality.

The RCD will not allow the concentration of articles published by a single institution or graduate program in an annual volume or in specific issues, guaranteeing the exogenous and geographic heterogeneity of authors.

The RCD does not condone the cross-publication of articles from specific and identified institutions or graduate programs.

The RCD does not publish articles with excessive or predatory cross-citation in order to artificially increase citations and impact factors.

2. Best practice guidelines for authors

Authors must submit an unpublished paper, i.e. one that has not been previously published in any other medium (chapter, book, journal, blog, etc.).

Authors must strictly observe the guidelines and regulations governing research involving living beings and human subjects. As the CEP/CONEP page states:

"Research involving human beings is research that, individually or collectively, has human beings as participants, in their entirety or parts, and involves them directly or indirectly, including the handling of their data, information or biological materials. Research involving human beings must be submitted to the CEP/CONEP System, which, when analyzing and deciding, becomes co-responsible for ensuring the protection of the participants."

Authors are forbidden to use inaccurate, imprecise, or dubious statements. Proper citation of the sources referred to in the scientific article is mandatory, and copying and/or plagiarism is expressly forbidden, in accordance with current legislation.

During the evaluation and editorial review process, authors may be required to provide the primary and secondary sources of their article under the penalty of not having it approved. Simultaneous submission of the article to another journal is expressly forbidden.

Articles sent to more than one journal will be rejected.

In the case of co-authorship, it is the duty of the corresponding author who sent the scientific article to RCD to include all co-authors, including their metadata.

The author should not request changes in the metadata of his article after publication. The RCD will not change the information after the article is published.

3. Good Practice Guidelines for Editors and Reviewers

Editors are responsible for the final decision on whether or not to approve articles published in RCD.

Editors have the duty to evaluate and publish articles, based exclusively on technical opinions that evaluate the quality of the content and its exposition, being prohibited from any form of discrimination.

The editors, Editorial Board members, and other collaborators are bound by the external secrecy rule, and information about the submission of scientific articles must be preserved.

The technical evaluation, the written opinion, and the blinded review of the scientific article by the collaborator represent material assistance to the editors, and the reviewing process is essential to the quality of the publication.

4. RCD & Statement on Publication Ethics

In addition to the above, together with other national and international journals, we pursue the statement below, based on the recommendations of Elsevier and the Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors of the Committee on Publication Ethics - COPE.

4.1 Duties of Editors

Decision to publish: the editor is responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editor is guided by the policies decided by the Editorial Board. These policies must comply with current legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. In making decisions, the editor may consult the Editorial Board and the referees.
Transparency and respect: the editor shall evaluate submitted manuscripts without regard to authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, nationality, or political philosophy

Confidentiality: the editor and other members of the editorial team shall not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript other than to the referees and editorial advisors.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest: The editor should not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript in their own research without the author's express written consent. The editor should decline to evaluate manuscripts in which he or she has conflicts of interest for competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions linked to the manuscripts.

Involvement and cooperation in investigations: the editor should take appropriate action when ethical complaints have been made about a submitted manuscript or published article.

4.2 Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to editorial decisions: the reviewers' review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the article.
Timeliness: any article reviewer who does not feel qualified to review the article or knows that it will be impossible to read it immediately should notify the editor immediately.

Confidentiality: papers received for review should be treated as confidential documents. They should not be shown or discussed with others.

Objectivity standards: reviews should be conducted in an objective manner. Reviewers should express their points of view clearly and supported by arguments.

On sources: referees should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. The reviewer should bring to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript in question and any other published work of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and conflict of interest: privileged information or insights gained by the referee through reading the manuscripts should be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. The referee should not evaluate manuscripts in which he/she has conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions linked to the manuscripts.

4.3 Authors' duties

General guidelines: authors of papers that refer to original research should provide an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Additional data should be accurately represented in the paper. The paper should contain sufficient detail and references to allow others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or intentionally inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Originality and plagiarism: authors must ensure that works are entirely original and if they use the work and/or texts of others that this is properly cited. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical editorial behavior and is unacceptable.
Multiple or redundant publications: an author should not publish manuscripts that essentially describe the same research in more than one journal. Publishing the same article in more than one journal without informing the editors and obtaining their consent constitutes unethical editorial behavior and is unacceptable.

About sources: the work of other authors should always be acknowledged. Authors should cite publications that were important in determining the nature of the work reported. Information obtained privately, such as in a conversation, correspondence, or discussion with a third party, should not be used or reported without the explicit written permission of the source. Information obtained through confidential services, such as manuscript referees or grant applications, should not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

Authorship: authorship of the work should be restricted to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study reported. All those who made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Individuals who participated in certain aspects of the research project should be listed as collaborators. The lead author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors are included in the paper. The lead author should also make sure that all coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest: all authors must disclose in the manuscript any financial or other conflicts that may influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
Fundamental errors in published work: when an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work it is the author's obligation to immediately inform the journal editor or the Journal Editor and cooperate with the editor to correct the article.

4.4 Duties of the Journal

We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprinting, or any other possible source of commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.

Our articles are peer-reviewed to ensure the quality of the scientific publication. This journal uses CopySpider (anti-plagiarism software).

* This statement is based on Elsevier recommendations and the Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors from the Committee on Publication Ethics - COPE.