Code of ethics

Ágora de Heterodoxias is a scientific journal of social sciences from the Deanery of Economic Science and Business Studies of Universidad Centroccidental Lisandro Alvarado, Barquisimeto, Venezuela. Its publications meets to what is present in the Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors (http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/Best_Practice.pdf), from Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Therefore, establishes the following:
From authors responsibilities

  • Comply with everything established in the Journal’s Publication Norms.
  • Submit an original and unpublished work. The journal will only consider unpublished articles consistent on their content and structure to the Ágora de Heterodoxias publishing policies. If the author or authors postulate to the journal an already published article, their acting will be considered unethical.
  • Ensure not to postulate a document, in a simultaneous manner, to another publishing house, virtual of a known or unknown mean.
  • Ensure that the accuracy of content and quotes of all the references of the article as of the materials associated to it, be original and not infringe the copyright. Therefore, the articles identified with plagiarism will be eliminated from the magazine, even if they are in the edition process, or if they have been published.
  • Recognize the authorship from the author or authors that participate on the writing.
  • Know everything related to the Journal’s approach, its scope, norms, policies of use and documents for authors.
  • Use, all the time, data and information based on reliable sources that can be replied in correspondence with the policy of Journal’s Open Access.
  • Acknowledge in the document the investigation financial sources, if there were any.
  • Agree to submit the articles to the processes of review and arbitration stipulated by Ágora de Heterodoxias. Either way, the Journal reserves the right to make minor style corrections, without prior consultation with the authors.
  • Let know the editor briefly of any error detected in the document, in order to rectify it as soon as possible.

To all previous responsibilities are added the ones contained in the Letter of cession of copyright, who keeps the intellectual property of their product.

From peer evaluators responsibilities

  • Respect the confidentiality policy of the articles’ opinion stated by the journal, which implies that the identity of the evaluators cannot be revealed to the authors, and that they should not do any kind of distribution or dissemination of the material subject to evaluation.
  • Respect the confidentiality of the writings before, during and after the arbitration process. Therefore, they must not be shown or discussed with other people.
  • Offer specific recommendations to the authors, in order to improve the quality of the writings presented.
  • Accept only the products that correspond to their academic training and to their specialty areas, and turn in an explicit evaluation adjusted to the journal’s evaluation format.
  • Decline the arbitrage when they do not have the conditions to revise the writing, whether due to time factors, the form of the manuscript, the theme or other; for this, they must notify the editor in a hasty manner so as not to delay the evaluation process.
  • Revise the writings in an objective and impartial manner, sustaining in detail and in a clear and respectful language the reasons for rejecting, if that were the result of the verdict.
  • Deliver a verdict within the agreed term with the editor-editor.
  • Inform of any conflict of interest identified at the moment of evaluating the writing assigned.
  • Register and inform the editor the similarities of a document with any other document published or any work in progress.

From Editorial Committee responsibilities

  • Define which of the writings sent to Ágora de Heterodoxias Journal will be evaluated and, according to the opinion of the arbitrators, published.
  • Safeguard the reputation of the journal by only publishing unpublished material, with academic and scientific relevance and quality.
  • Keep the periodicity established in the journal.
  • Value the received writings before being sent to the process of evaluation, double-blind, from the peers in where the adjustments to “Norms for authors” established by the journal are checked.
  • Accept or reject the writings received, based only on the anonymous opinion received by the peers. (In case of a discrepancy on the criteria of acceptance or rejection from the peers, the final decision will be responsibility of the journal’s Director-editor, the Editorial Committee and the Scientific Committee).
  • Promote the diffusion of the magazine on different academic and investigation areas.
  • Offer clear an appropriate information to authors during the process inherent to the publication or rejection of the article.
  • Provide the necessary information to the revisers involved in the editorial process.
  • Carry out a transparent and impartial process of edition and publication, respecting the authors and their works.
  • Be available to authors and evaluators in order to clarify doubts that could emerge during the processes of evaluation and edition.
  • Avoid, as far as possible, an accusation for plagiarism