Ética editorial

The journal Engineering: Science, Technology and Innovation follows the ethical standards accepted by the international scientific community. This statement of publication ethics, based on the guidelines and standards developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), includes the respective responsibilities of authors, reviewers and editors.

Responsibilities of Editors and Editorial Team

• Impartiality and confidentiality

The editors and editorial team evaluate manuscripts solely on the basis of their academic merit, without regard to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, nationality, or institutional affiliation of the authors.

All information about manuscripts is treated confidentially. It is not shared with persons outside the review process, except with reviewers and, if necessary, with members of the journal.

• Transparency in the peer review process

It is the responsibility of the editors to ensure a fair and transparent peer review process. Manuscripts undergo double-blind review, where neither the author nor the reviewers know the identity of the other party, in order to maintain objectivity and avoid conflicts of interest.

The editorial team selects qualified reviewers and avoids assigning reviewers with potential conflicts of interest in relation to the content of the manuscript.

• Integrity and prevention of unethical practices

Editors are committed to preventing and detecting unethical practices, such as plagiarism, duplicate publication, data manipulation, and other forms of scientific misconduct.

In case of suspicion or evidence of misconduct, the editors will follow the protocols established by international regulations, investigate the facts, and take the necessary measures, which may include withdrawal of articles.

• Transparency in editorial decisions

Editorial decisions are based exclusively on scientific quality, academic contribution, and compliance with the journal's requirements. The editorial team is committed to communicating its decisions clearly and promptly, providing constructive feedback to authors whenever possible.

• Commitment to continuous improvement

The editors and editorial team undergo continuous training and updating on editorial ethics standards and best practices in order to offer a high-quality service to both authors and readers.

In addition, suggestions and comments are welcome in order to continuously improve the publication process and maintain the integrity of our scientific journal.

Responsibilities of authors

• Originality and authenticity

Authors must ensure that the work submitted is original and has not been previously published in another journal Any use of ideas, data, or words from other works must be properly cited and referenced.

Simultaneous submission of the manuscript to more than one journal is not permitted.  The content submitted must be unpublished and contribute academic value to the field of study.

• Accuracy and truthfulness of data

Authors must ensure that the data and results presented in the manuscript are accurate, complete, and have been collected ethically. It is the responsibility of the authors to avoid manipulation, falsification, or fabrication of data.

If any significant error or inaccuracy is discovered in their work, it is the author's responsibility to notify the journal immediately to correct or retract the article if necessary.

• Citation and acknowledgement of sources

Authors must correctly cite all sources that have influenced their research, acknowledging the contribution of previous works and other researchers.

If content, figures, or data that are not their own are used, authors must have the appropriate permissions for their reproduction.

• Authorship and contributions statement

Only those who have made significant contributions to the development of the manuscript should be listed as authors. Authors must clearly define each author's contribution and acknowledge the work of all collaborators.

The inclusion of individuals who have not actively participated in the research (honorary authorship) or the omission of relevant authors is prohibited.

• Conflict of interest statement

Authors must declare any financial or personal conflicts of interest that could influence the results of the research or the interpretation of the data.

Transparency in conflicts of interest helps to maintain the integrity and trustworthiness of published work.

• Compliance with ethical and legal regulations

Authors must confirm that their work complies with relevant ethical and legal standards, especially when it involves experiments with humans or animals. They must provide evidence that the research was approved by the appropriate ethics committee, where applicable.

They must also respect the privacy and confidentiality rights of participants and obtain informed consent when necessary.

• Data availability and reproducibility

Authors must be willing to share relevant data and materials, to the extent possible, to allow for verification and reproducibility of results.

If necessary, authors are requested to provide access to the underlying data or tools used to enable validation of their findings.

Responsibilities of reviewers

• Confidentiality

Reviewers must treat each manuscript as a confidential document. The content of the manuscript should not be shared or discussed with persons outside the review process without the explicit authorisation of the editor.

It is forbidden to use information obtained during the review for personal gain or for any purpose other than the scientific evaluation of the manuscript.

• Objectivity and fairness

Reviewers must provide an objective, fair and impartial evaluation. Any personal bias towards the authors must be avoided, and criticism or recommendations must be based on scientific evidence and sound reasoning.

Feedback must be constructive, respectful and aimed at improving the quality of the work, avoiding personal comments or inappropriate judgements.

• Conflicts of interest

Reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest (financial, personal, academic or professional) that may influence their ability to conduct an objective review. In the event of a conflict, they must decline the invitation to review the manuscript.

It is crucial that reviewers immediately notify the editor if they perceive that a relationship with the authors or the content could compromise their impartiality.

• Rigour and quality in evaluation

Reviewers undertake to conduct a detailed and thorough review, identifying strengths, weaknesses and opportunities for improvement in the manuscript.

They must point out any aspects of scientific misconduct, such as plagiarism, data manipulation or duplication of publications, and notify the editor in case of suspicion.

• Deadline compliance

Reviewers should only accept an invitation to review a manuscript if they have the availability and time necessary to complete a quality assessment within the established deadline.

If, for any reason, they are unable to meet the review deadline, they should inform the editor as soon as possible to avoid delays in the review process.

• Transparency in recommendations

Reviewers must clearly justify their recommendations for acceptance, revision, or rejection of the manuscript, providing solid arguments to support their comments and suggestions.

If possible, authors must be guided on specific aspects that can strengthen their work and meet the journal's scientific standards.