Statement of Ethics and Editorial Practices

Sincronía, an electronic journal of continuous publication in Philosophy, Literature, and Humanities, from the University of Guadalajara, publishes approximately 18 articles per year, the result of scientific research by national and international authors, as well as original and unpublished literary works from the artistic and literary community, which are highly recognized professionally in the field of social sciences and humanities. Our main objective is to disseminate scientific knowledge and literary works and make them available to the community at large through a comprehensive open access system.

Therefore, the editors of Sincronía have adopted the ethical criteria established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), assuming an ethical commitment to neutrality in relation to the content of articles submitted to the journal, without prejudice based on religious, political, ethnic, gender, or any other ideologies that may generate controversy or debate.

Articles and literary works submitted to the editorial staff of Sincronía for consideration for future publication undergo various review processes: technical, methodological, and content aspects. On average, three reviews are carried out per article before publication, and each reviewer (editors and evaluators) is responsible for the corresponding process. Therefore, each member of the editorial team, including the evaluators, must objectively adhere to the ethical criteria established by the journal and commit to acting objectively, professionally, and ethically at all stages of the editorial process.

1.- ETHICAL PRINCIPLES.

1.1.- It is the responsibility of the Technical Editorial Secretary to:

Proceed at all times in an objective and professional manner in the performance of their duties, without discrimination on the basis of gender, sexual orientation, religious, political, ethnic, or any other ideology that may generate controversy or dispute.
Processing articles that are accepted equally, without making any distinction or giving preference to authors of high prestige, or based on academic merits, whether national or foreign, avoiding commercial, personal, or other influences at all times.
Being the first instance in the resolution of complaints and disputes.
Receive written complaints from authors when they are of an ethical nature or motivated by a procedural problem with the article and refer them to the journal's management for proper processing.
Follow up on complaints submitted by authors in a timely manner, following the appropriate procedures, giving the author the right of reply and considering the arguments that gave rise to the complaint.
Investigate the origin of complaints and present the author with the resolutions issued by the journal's management in writing.
Keep all documentation and archives of the journal in an organized manner.

1.2.- It is the responsibility of the reviewer:

To objectively adhere to the evaluation criteria established in the basic review form.
To conduct themselves objectively and professionally in the review of articles without allowing their academic or personal perspective on the subject to influence them.
To objectively review the articles submitted to them by the Technical Editorial Secretary, propose improvements in the quality of the works, and forward them to the journal's editorial staff for follow-up.
To maintain the confidentiality of the authors or any information provided by the Technical Editorial Secretary.
Avoid keeping the reviewed work, copying it, or processing it for any work of your own authorship.
Notify the Technical Editorial Secretary in a timely manner if the work under review is similar to another that has already been published or is in the process of being reviewed by another journal.
Inform the Technical Editorial Secretary in a timely manner if the work under review presents a conflict of interest.
Request in a timely manner from the Technical Editorial Secretary a change of the article to be reviewed if they consider that it is outside their area of expertise.
Point out relevant published work that has not yet been cited.

1.3.- It is the author's responsibility to:

Submit their contribution within the deadlines mentioned in the corresponding call for papers, complying with the requirements mentioned therein.
Respond in a timely manner to the comments made by the Technical Editorial Secretary and Reviewer.
Provide the Technical Editorial Secretary with the necessary information to identify the author, including those related to their article.
Sign the authorship declaration to confirm that the work submitted is not simultaneously under review or submitted for publication to another journal.
Confirm that your article is original and unpublished at the time of submission for publication in Sincronía.
Obtain the necessary permissions if your work includes graphic sources (photographs, tables, or any other type that requires it) and provide the Technical Editorial Secretary with the permissions granted.
Cite all sources used in your work.
Declare any conflicts of interest and avoid any influence during the editorial process.
Notify the Technical Editorial Secretary in a timely manner if any significant errors are identified in the publication and cooperate with them in correcting them when required.

2.- UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR.

2.1.- The following is considered unethical behavior:

When any member of the Management, Editorial Committee, or Reviewer receives a gift (financial or in kind) from any person or author in order for an article under review to be approved.
When the Technical Editorial Secretary, Reviewer, author, or any member of the journal fails to fulfill their professional responsibilities, affecting the interests of the journal or the authors.
When the Technical Editorial Secretary does not accept a publication proposal without presenting the necessary and convincing arguments or due to personal or political conflicts with the author.
When the Technical Editorial Secretary, Management, Reviewer, author, or any member of the journal does not conduct themselves with due respect to the other party in cases of conflict or complaint.
When Management, the Editorial Committee, or the Reviewer do not uphold the ethical principle of author confidentiality.
When the Management, Editorial Committee, or Reviewer provides third parties with information about the journal, authors, documents, or any other text without the corresponding permissions, and this represents economic, material, or any other type of damage to the journal, its members, or authors.
When the Technical Editorial Secretary does not adequately follow up on complaints submitted by authors.
When the Management or Editorial Committee does not follow the appropriate procedure, does so only partially, or fails to resolve a conflict or complaint submitted in a timely manner by the author.
When the author attempts to give a gift (financial or in kind) to any member of the Management or Editorial Committee so that the resolution of a conflict is in their favor.
When the author does not respond to the observations made by the Technical Editorial Secretary or Reviewer, which will result in the suspension of the article in the editorial process.
When the author does not sign the declaration of authorship or the corresponding license and insists on the publication of their article.
When the author does not adequately cite parts of their text whose source is from another author and are not part of those mentioned in number 16 of this code.
When the author does not submit the authorizations requested by the Technical Editorial Secretary.
When the author intends to publish more than one article in the same edition without malice.
When the author includes more bibliographic references than those cited in their work and it is not classified as indirect plagiarism.
When the author commits plagiarism in any of the following ways:

Direct plagiarism: When a text or work is transcribed, copied, or reproduced verbatim without the original author's permission or without specifying the original source; when the original author is not credited; when minor changes are made to the quotation without mentioning that it is a quotation; and when synonyms are used in a quotation and presented as one's own text.
Indirect plagiarism: When the citation system is not used correctly; when in a direct quotation, quotation marks are opened and it is not specified where they close; when opening and closing quotation marks are followed by the quotation; when a paraphrase is used in a manner almost identical to the quotation; when the author is not credited when using a paraphrase; when there is unquoted bibliography in the final list of references; when a citation is made and the reference is not included in the final list.
Plagiarism of references: When a citation is made and the reference does not correspond to the author of the reference; when reference data is omitted; when, when citing, only the author is mentioned but not the reference work, or vice versa.
Self-plagiarism or text recycling: When reusing one's own previously published material without indicating the reference to the previous work; when attempting to publish an article that has already been published and presenting it as a new one; when repeatedly citing one's own previously published works in the same text.

3.- PROCEDURE FOR RESOLVING CONFLICTS, VIOLATIONS, AND UNETHICAL CONDUCT

3.1.- Identification of unethical conduct:

Any person, whether a reader, author, Technical Editorial Secretary, or member of the journal, may detect unethical conduct and bring it to the attention of the Editor at any time necessary. Such conduct is not limited to that established in the previous section.
The person who informs the Technical Editorial Secretary of the conduct in question must provide the necessary evidence to verify such conduct in order to initiate the investigation process. All accusations are important and will be treated with the respect and seriousness they deserve, with follow-up until the end of the process and resolution of the case.

3.2.- Procedure and investigation:

The Technical Editorial Secretary is the first instance that will have the function of resolving the conflict in cases of minor infractions, after consulting with Management.
When the infraction is of greater consideration or serious, the case will be referred to Management, who will have the power to resolve the matter.
The Technical Editorial Secretary shall compile a file with the necessary evidence on the case in question and refer it to the Management for review. Only the information revealed in the evidence will be taken into account.
The Management will hear the arguments of the affected party, either in person or in writing through any means of communication.
Management will hear the parties in conflict, giving each of them the right to express their grounds and arguments, maintaining the required objectivity and impartiality at all times.
Management will set a specific time frame for analyzing the case and will issue a final decision.
All decisions will be made in writing, with copies sent to the parties involved and the magazine's archives.

3.3.- Hierarchy for conflict resolution:

If the infringement is minor, it will be resolved by the Technical Editorial Secretary.
If the infringement is major, serious, or committed by the Technical Editorial Secretary, it will be resolved by the Management.
If the infringement is committed by a member of the Management, it will be resolved by the Heads of the Departments to which the journal is attached.
If the infringement is committed by a member of the Editorial Committee, it shall be resolved by the Management.
In all cases, the procedure described in section 3.2 shall be followed.

3.4.- The following are considered minor infringements:

Minor misconduct that does not jeopardize the integrity of the journal, its contents, the authors, or any other member of the editorial board, and which is caused by omissions or negligence on the part of the offender, who shall have the right to express their arguments to the Technical Editorial Secretary in writing, clarifying the points for which the offense was committed.
Paragraphs 10 to 15 of paragraph 2, corresponding to unethical behavior, of this code.

3.5.- The following are considered serious offenses:

Those that lack decorum and respect for individuals, expressing offenses or violating the rights of any member of the community or undermining the interests of the journal or the University of Guadalajara.
Sections 1 to 9 of point 2, corresponding to unethical behavior, of this code.
Plagiarism in any of the forms mentioned in section 16 of Unethical Behavior.
Negative publicity towards the journal or coercion to prevent contributors from participating in it.
Verbal or physical aggression against members of the journal or any of its contributors.
Those that constitute criminal offenses.

4.- RESOLUTIONS ISSUED FOR THE RESOLUTION OF CONFLICTS:

Written notice to the offender about the offense committed, clarifying the omission or misunderstanding so that the necessary corrections can be made.
Letter addressed to the offender, warning them about the malpractice and alerting them to the consequences of unethical behavior in the future.
Written notice published in the magazine, detailing the editorial misconduct.
Letter addressed to the head of the department to which the offender belongs, detailing the misconduct and requesting that the institution's rules be followed.
Formal cancellation of the offender's contributions for a specified period of time.
If necessary, report the matter to the university authorities so that appropriate measures can be taken in response to the misconduct.

(Document prepared by: Nicolás Medina García, Esq.)