Instructions for evaluation

  1. Plagiarism and Self-Plagiarism: Detection and Procedures

Undoubtedly, the misuse of resources by third parties or oneself is one of the most serious faults to ethics and probity in matters of scientific research and publication. On the subject there is a vast bibliography where the problem is characterized in its multiple dimensions (only as reference, you can consult Ética editorial: cómo detectar el plagio por medios automatizados  (Editorial ethics: how to detect plagiarism by automated means) in http://blog.scielo.org/en/2014/02/12/etica-editorial-como-detectar-el-plagio-por-medios-automatizados/ )

This journal assumes the concern for the phenomenon through the following actions:

Detection by electronic means: submitting documents to the revision and checking of titles of works, names of authors and contents in web searchers (Google, DDG). Specialized open source tools are also used, such as: http://plagiarism-detect.com/  y http://turnitin.com/, in addition to being aware of advice and guidance from HTW, the main undertaking in the field http://plagiat.htw-berlin.de/software-en/test2013/

Detection of style: through comparison of suspicious paragraphs, work that is entrusted to our executive editorial team.

On the other hand, the presumptions or judgments of (auto) plagiarism and other forms of deceptive use of previous productions are submitted to the following procedure:

  1. Rating of the suspicion or misconduct by the Executive Editorial Committee of the journal.
  1. Communication of the suspicion or confirmed fraud (data and evidence) to the author(s).
  1. Indication of a deadline for disclaimers and/or clarifications. The deadline, except for reasons of force majeure, is peremptory, and will not be extended beyond the 30 calendar days from the moment of communication to those affected.
  1. Weighting, in appropriate cases, of clarifications and assurance backups from questioned authors.
  1. Resolution and final verdict, by the Executive Committee, on the final destination of the work questioned in a period not exceeding 60 days. The verdict will be final and not open to appeal.

The entire procedure will be in writing and will be duly supported in the management files of the journal. If necessary, the Executive Committee of the publication may request the advice or opinion of experts from outside the publishing body in order to have elements for the best resolution.  

The only sanction to which the authors who have effectively committed the lack of plagiarism and self-plagiarism (who have not given a clear and conclusive answer to the doubts and objections), will be the impossibility of getting new texts and communications to the journal for 3 years. The journal reserves the right, depending on the nature and effects of the problem to be addressed, to communicate results publicly and/or pass the information to other administrative and jurisdictional instances relevant to the matter.

Note: for purposes of definitions of concepts and qualification of the eventual detection of this type of misconduct, this journal will comply with those stipulated by COPE, International Committee of Medical Journals Editors and Plagiat-HTW .

  1. Copyright - Open Access

The authors published in Economía y Política  accept the conditions of publication, distribution, preservation and use of content contemplated by this magazine through the Creative Commons BY license  https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

To do this, together with their proposal for an article, they must also send a letter of assignment of rights, originality and license, according to the model below.

The authors can make unrestricted use of their production, always complying with the requirements of said license which is to cite the respective edition of this magazine as the original source.

Economía y Política welcomes and promotes compliance with open access without any condition or restriction to the texts and data disclosed by it. Economía y Política endorses all international declarations that favor open access, such as those in Budapest, Berlin, Bethesda, among others.

Full Open Access  

Financing and Distribution:

Economía y Política does not charge any kind of right or pecuniary charge to authors for the reception and editorial management of their publication proposals. Nor does it pay for collaborations of any kind. The production and online costs of this journal are covered by the publishing entity. Economía y Política is a publication of free access and open to all interested.

Preservation of contents:   In addition to the own institutional resources (Repository), Economía y Política preserves its contents through OJS 3.0 in the repository, thus ensuring the persistence and recoverability of the same.  

Letter of originality, no simultaneous application and copyright. Complete and send to

In ... ... (city, country), to ... (date)

Dear Sir/Madam

Economía y Política Magazine

Adolfo Ibáñez University

PRESENT

According to the demands of Economía y Política, the subscribers point out the originality and not simultaneous postulation of the article (...title ...) that is sent together with this one. Likewise, in the event of final approval of its publication, the copyright is freely transferred to the journal for non-exclusive dissemination in the terms it deems appropriate. Finally, the commitment to inform the editors of subsequent editions of the article, citing the source, is assumed.

Sincerely,

Author(s), names and signatures

Peerreviewand evaluation guideline

1.-The editorial management of Economía y Política (EP)establishes that all work presented for publication as a research or review article must be submitted to the evaluation by two fully recognized ‘blind’ readers and specialists in the thematic field in which the manuscript is inserted. In case of a clear discrepancy between the evaluators, the Editorial Committee will seek a third opinion. However, the final decision of publication will always be in the hands of at least one of the co-directors or their designees for this purpose.

2. Economía y Política has the collaboration of external evaluators who are not part of its editorial team and the publishing institution.

3. EP considers the work of the evaluator of the utmost importance in the process of scientific communication. It is not only useful for the purposes of publication, but especially for the task of our own academic community and researchers, since making and receiving well-done and better-commented evaluations are a first-order input for continuous improvement of scientific work and dissemination of results. Not in vain, in this task is verified the beneficial circularity that touches us to be, at the same time, producers and validators of the so-called scientific knowledge.

 4. This guideline consists of two parts. First, there are the five criteria that the evaluator must complete after reading the article proposal. Before each comment, the evaluator must write in capital letters the initials corresponding to: LA: Achieved Widely; ML: Moderately Achieved; EL: Scarcely Achieved; NL: Not Achieved. After that, the evaluator must indicate the reasons that justify your decision.

In the second part, a verdict is requested based on four options. Of these, the evaluator must choose only one of them, adding other considerations in addition to those already expressed in the first part. The options are:

  1. It is approved without qualms: It is estimated that the article fully complies with all formal requirements and content.
  1. Approved with objections: It is considered that the article meets basic requirements for publication; however, minor changes or improvements are suggested
  1. It is rejected with option: It is concluded that the proposal cannot be published as presented. However, due to its value or attractiveness, it is granted the possibility of re-presenting on the basis of proposed changes
  1. It is rejected: the article does not have the relevance or the possibility of continuing in the editing process.

Finally, remember: provide as much additional information as possible that will help this journal decide on the publication of an article, as well as suggestions so that the authors can correct possible weaknesses and perfect their work. For example, in kind terms, suggest bibliography; give examples of poor wording of the text (individualizing paragraphs and pages); indicate if the article has excessive technicalities or specialized jargon; state if in your opinion the wording is unkind to the reader, etc.

  1. GUIDELINE

Criterion

Comments

Content evaluation: relevance and originality of the text

 

 

Criterion

Comments

Relevance and topicality of the bibliography, resources and/or sources consulted

 

 

Criterion

Comments

Argument strategy: consistency between the problem, the demonstration and the conclusions or results achieved

 

 

Criterion

Comments

Thematic opening: the proposal suggests new questions and approaches

 

 

Criterion

Comments

Formal structure: clarity of the exhibition and its writing.

 

 

  1. Verdict: mark with an X and argue your choice (once the alternative is chosen, you can delete the remaining ones)

 

Approval without repairs:

Approval with objections:

Rejection with option:

Rejection: