Ethical Standards for Publication
Ethical Publishing Guidelines
The peer-reviewed journal CIE: Knowledge, Research and Education promotes the highest ethical standards in the publication of scientific and technical articles. All authors, reviewers, and editors are expected to adhere to these standards.
In CIE: Knowledge, Research and Education, each submitted article is evaluated and published based on its scientific merit and contributions, ensuring the implementation of best practices at every stage of the publication process. Manuscripts are thoroughly screened for potential plagiarism using Turnitin. In addition, every article submitted for review must meet the following requirements:
Consent: All authors must consent to the submission and publication of the article under review.
Originality: The submitted article must be original, unpublished, and not simultaneously under review by another journal.
Permission to reproduce work: The article must not contain original material copied from other authors without permission. If material from other authors is used, explicit consent for print and electronic reproduction must be indicated.
Prior research: All information derived from previous studies must be properly referenced. If the article analyzes previously published proposals, it must be appropriately cited.
Journal archives: The article under review will be retained in the archives of CIE: Knowledge, Research and Education and will be considered a valid publication only if it complies with all the aforementioned criteria.
Reviewer committee: Members of the review committee must not have any employment, academic, or personal relationship with the authors.
1. RESEARCH INTEGRITY
1.1. Misconduct in Research:
Misconduct includes fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in the proposal, conduct, review, or reporting of research. If the Editorial Committee suspects misconduct, it will initiate an investigation in collaboration with the supporting institution, employer, sponsor, or relevant national body.
1.2. Reporting Irregularities:
Complaints, whether identified or anonymous, will be investigated only if accompanied by supporting evidence.
1.3. Image Manipulation:
While image editing is sometimes necessary to highlight features, inappropriate manipulation can be misleading. Authors must report any editing performed. Specific features must not be altered, and original, unedited images must be provided alongside the final versions. Adjustments to brightness or contrast are allowed only if applied uniformly and do not distort the image's meaning. Cropping or nonlinear adjustments must be clearly described in the figure caption. Composite figures must be indicated with dividing lines and corresponding legend notes.
1.4. Plagiarism:
Plagiarism—including copying or misusing someone else’s intellectual property—is strictly prohibited. All manuscripts are thoroughly screened for plagiarism.
1.5. Duplicate and Redundant Publication:
Authors should avoid publishing previously reported data as original. Republishing data is permitted only with proper acknowledgment. Abstracts, posters, non-interpreted data sets, and archived theses/dissertations are not considered duplicate publications.
1.6. Text Recycling:
Partial results of previously published work may be republished for a different audience if discussion and conclusions are distinct.
1.7. Simultaneous Submission:
Simultaneous submission to multiple journals is not permitted. Manuscripts found in breach of this will be rejected.
1.8. Translated Duplicates:
Translations of already published manuscripts will not be considered.
1.9. Sanctions:
Penalties will be applied consistently after careful consideration. Retractions will be issued first. In severe cases, the author’s institution will be notified, and future submissions by the involved authors may be barred.
2. EDITORIAL STANDARDS AND PROCESSES
2.1. Authorship:
Author order must reflect actual contributions.
All authors must sign an authorization indicating their involvement.
Non-author contributors must be acknowledged with permission.
Ethical committee approval must be submitted.
All communications are shared with every listed author.
2.2. Authorship Disputes:
Suspected authorship issues will lead to direct communication with the corresponding author, and potentially other authors.
2.3. Funding:
All funding sources and their roles must be detailed in the acknowledgments.
If no funding was received, this must be explicitly stated. Editorial assistance must also be acknowledged.
2.4. Peer Review:
A double-blind review system is used for all submissions, except editorial content.
Confidentiality is strictly maintained.
Reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest.
Reviewers must recuse themselves from evaluating manuscripts involving recent collaboration or institutional ties with the authors.
2.5. Publication Timelines:
The journal ensures timely peer review and avoids unnecessary delays.
2.6. Editors and Staff as Authors:
Editors and board members do not participate in decisions regarding their own work.
A transparent process is followed for editorial decision-making in such cases.
2.7. Conflicts of Interest:
All parties (editors, authors, reviewers) must disclose potential conflicts—financial, personal, political, or religious.
Authors must describe relevant funding, its purpose, and any relevant ownerships or shares.
2.8. Defamation:
Manuscripts and reviews are monitored for defamatory content or negligent misrepresentations.
Authors are responsible for any defamatory expressions.
2.9. Editorial Independence:
Although funded by the University of Pamplona, editorial decisions remain independent.
2.10. Academic Debate:
Constructive correspondence is encouraged.
When correspondence discusses a specific article, the author is invited to respond.
Author responses and correspondence are published together when possible. Authors may comment on the value of correspondence but may not veto it.
2.11. Appeals:
Authors may appeal editorial decisions.
Appeals require new information to reverse prior decisions.
Additional reviewer input may be sought.
2.12. Corrections:
Readers and authors must report publication errors, especially those affecting data interpretation.
Corrections or retractions will be published as necessary.
Authors must cooperate with issuing corrections.
2.13. Retractions and Expressions of Concern:
The journal follows COPE guidelines.
Retractions occur when errors affect interpretation or when misconduct is identified.
Corrections are noted at the end of the original article.
Retracted documents are replaced with notices indicating the reasons and referencing the original article.
2.14. Article Removal:
Articles may only be removed for legal violations, defamation, or false/inaccurate data.
A formal withdrawal notice will be published.
2.15. Data Protection Legislation:
The journal complies with data protection laws.
3. COMPLAINTS, GRIEVANCES, AND APPEALS
The journal accepts complaints and appeals via kleeder.bracho@unipamplona.edu.co, to be handled confidentially by the Editor-in-Chief.
Misconduct allegations may relate to any individual involved in the research or publication process. The journal strictly adheres to COPE protocols, which include:
Detection and Notification:
The author is informed of the violation.
The Editorial and Scientific Committees are notified.
Editorial Committee Report:
A detailed report on the complaint is prepared.
Emergency Meeting:
The Editorial and Scientific Committees meet urgently to assess the case.
Final Decision:
A definitive decision is made.
If a team member is involved, they are recused from the process.
If the case involves editors or authors directly, the Associate Editor and the university’s legal counsel will handle the matter.
Sanctions may include an erratum, corrigendum, or retraction. In severe cases, the article will be withdrawn and the author banned from future submissions. The violation will be reported to the author's superior.
4. AUTHOR RESPONSIBILITIES
Data and Procedures: Must be detailed and transparent. Fraudulent calculations are considered ethical violations.
Originality and Plagiarism: Proper citation is required. All forms of plagiarism (copying, paraphrasing, misattribution) are unacceptable.
Duplicate Submission: Submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals is unethical.
Source Acknowledgment: All influential work must be cited, and written permission is required to use confidential information.
Authorship: Limited to those who significantly contributed. All co-authors must approve the final version.
Disclosure: Authors must disclose financial or other conflicts of interest, including employment, consultancy, or equity holdings.
Similarity Analysis: Turnitin is used to check for plagiarism and ensure reference integrity.
Error Reporting: Authors must notify the Editor about significant errors and cooperate with corrections or retractions.
5. EDITOR RESPONSIBILITIES
Publication Decisions: Based on peer review reports and legal compliance.
Fair Play: Evaluations are bias-free, supported by double-blind review.
Conflicts of Interest: Editors will not use unpublished material or review conflicting submissions.
Ethical Training: Editors educate researchers, especially early-career ones, about ethical standards.
Peer Review Oversight: Ensures fair, timely, and unbiased review by qualified experts.
Integrity Monitoring: Editors safeguard the accuracy and integrity of the academic record.
6. REVIEWER RESPONSIBILITIES
Editorial Contribution: Peer review supports editorial decisions and provides constructive feedback.
Timeliness: Reviewers must inform the Editor if they cannot meet deadlines.
Confidentiality: Manuscripts must be treated as confidential documents.
Objectivity: Reviews must be objective and respectful, supported by logical arguments.
Source Acknowledgment: Reviewers must alert editors to missing citations or similarities with previous works.
Disclosure: Reviewers must not use unpublished material and must recuse themselves in case of conflicts of interest.
