Below are the Editorial Policies of Procesos:

Editorial Policy by Procesos

 

Open Access Policy

 

About Plagiarism

In order to preserve the quality and academic rigor of Procesos, in case plagiarism is detected, the manuscript will be rejected and returned to its author. The review process of the text will thus be definitively suspended, as a final decision. Those interested in submitting contributions are expected to conduct their academic practice within the principles of intellectual honesty, academic rigor, and good editorial practices. Before submitting a text, it is recommended that authors use the relevant resources, including computer tools and anti-plagiarism software.

 

Digital preservation policy

The preservation of the OJS platform is carried out periodically during the process of backing up the information of the Procesos magazine. Identical copies are incrementally maintained daily, and a full copy of the entire OJS portal and its database is made weekly. In this sense, the magazine has the following storage system:

LOCKSS

In addition, Procesos maintains a digital repository on the WEB page of its publishing entity, the Universidad Andina Simón Bolívar, Ecuador Headquarters. Below is the link to the repository:

Repositorio Universidad Andina Simón Bolívar

 

Peer Review Process

Articles: The submissions to Procesos are subject to various assessment screenings to ensure quality and relevance. First, the submission is carefully reviewed to ascertain whether or not it meets formal submittal and formatting requirements: length, subject in line with the journal’s scope of interests, clear writing, originality, and scholarship. If any of these requirements are not met, the manuscript is returned to its author with observations. The purpose of this preliminary screening is to ensure that the articles comply with high academic standards.

Those submissions that have passed this first stage of the review are referred to two academic peers, who shall assess them on the basis of what is traditionally identified as the double-blind peer review. The jury members are chosen for their experience in the subject area and in accordance to the approach used in each article. The anonymous evaluations are sent to the author of the article, with the comments on form and substance made by the referees and their opinion (accepted, accepted with modifications, or rejected). If the opinions of the two peer reviewers clash or if there is any kind of dispute, the Redaction Board of Procesos shall invite a third peer reviewer, whose ruling shall be final. Other settlement mechanisms require the Editor-in-Chief or Redaction Board to weigh up the findings of the anonymous peer review before sending the compendium of arbitration or to delegate the decision to the guest editor or editors in charge of a dossier or thematic issue, if applicable.

After the manuscript’s author has incorporated the observations made by the anonymous reviewers, the paper is ready to be published. The Redaction Board shall decide in which issue of the journal the article is to be published. Procesos reserves the right to proofread the material it publishes for the purpose of improving its readability.

In the initial stage of the review, the Redaction Board may approve or reject manuscripts submitted to the consideration of Procesos both before and after the double-blind peer review. The decisions stemming from this right are based on two basic criteria: 1) scholarly evidence supporting the contents being presented; and 2) compliance with the journal’s editorial policies.

The anonymous evaluators, or double-blind peer reviewers, are chosen by the journal’s Redaction Board on the basis of their suitability, scholarship, and knowledge of the subject being discussed. In each case, Procesos extends a cordial invitation to these experts to review the manuscripts by a pre-established deadline (see Editorial Guidelines). If any of the reviewers cannot do so, they must write to the journal to decline the invitation. In that case, Procesos makes an effort to designate another reviewer who can meet the pre-established deadline. If there are any conflicts of interest, the reviewers designated by Procesos must refrain from reviewing the material assigned to them and must also inform the Editor-in-Chief or Redaction Board about the nature of said conflict.

Critical Dialogues and Reviews: The manuscripts published in the journal’s Critical Dialogue section consists of reviews of books previously selected by the journal. The authors of these reviews are specifically invited by the section’s editor. The submissions are evaluated by the Redaction Board on the basis of their quality, relevance, and scholarship. In coordination with the Redaction Board, the section’s editor determines how many book reviews are published in each issue.

The material submitted to the Reviews section are evaluated by the section’s editor, who in coordination with the Redaction Board approves or rejects their publication on the basis of the criteria set by Procesos (see Editorial Guidelines).

 

Code of Ethics

Procesos: Ecuadorian Journal of History is produced by the history department of the Simón Bolívar Andean University, Ecuador Campus (UASB-E). As an academic publication of this graduate school, Procesos is committed to promoting ethical conduct in each of its editorial procedures. Procesos also applies the principles of the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors (https://publicationethics.org/resources/code-conduct) of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) as a primary reference in this matter.

Both the Editorial Board and the International Advisory Committee of Procesos guarantee that each staff member involved in the journal’s review stages is complying with best editorial practices in regard to the publication of its contents. These commitments are specified below.

Authors

• All contributions submitted to Procesos must be original and unpublished.
• Papers submitted to Procesos for consideration may not be submitted for review to another scholarly journal at the same time. This practice is widely condemned for the dissemination of all scholarly publications. Therefore authors must refrain from sending multiple or repeated submissions of their manuscripts.
• The author grants Procesos the right to copy (Copyright ©), which gives irrevocable and unlimited permission to use, distribute, publish, license, exhibit, record, digitize, disseminate, reproduce and archive the article and/or the associated presentation, in any format or medium, whether currently known or later developed. On this basis, in case the author wishes to publish their work in another non-indexed diffusion medium (since it is not allowed to do so in another indexed diffusion medium), they must request express permission from Procesos. Should this permission be granted, they must reference it as the original publication source. All papers published by Procesos are available on open access. For authors, the journal publishes their work free of charge.
• To ensure the scholarship of the published works, authors are required to provide thorough and precise references, bibliography, and original documentary sources used (see Editorial Guidelines).
• Errors or inaccuracies. If the author of a manuscript identifies inaccuracies or errors in his or her work, even after it has been reviewed and accepted for publication by the double-blind peer reviewers, he or she shall pledge to inform the Redaction Board of Procesos and provide it with the necessary data to implement the respective corrections.
• Current relevance of the contributions. As for the current relevance of the contributions, their authors pledge, to the extent possible, to use the most recent and relevant scholarship on the subjects being expounded.
• Acknowledgment of collaboration or authorship in line with the level of responsibility. Authors shall guarantee the inclusion of all persons who have made significant contributions to their papers or have been involved in them in terms of both conceptualization and the work required for gathering the sources for the results or their systematization.
• If the editors deem it is relevant, authors of submissions must make the sources or empirical data on which they have based their paper available to the journal. This information shall be handled confidentially and shall be kept by the editors for a specific lapse of time. They can eventually make them accessible.
• Conflicts of interest. When making their submissions, authors are required to state explicitly that there are no conflicts of interest or competing interests that might have influenced the outcome of their research or their interpretations thereof. They are also required to mention explicitly the sources of funding for their research (from research centers, universities, state or public institutions, or civil society organizations).

Peer reviewers

• Commitment to evaluate a submission and make an editorial decision. By accepting the invitation to review a submission, peer reviewers confirm their commitment to conduct a rigorous and critical review of the material entrusted to them.
• The peer review shall be conducted impartially and without any value judgments in its decisions. Reviewers are required to inform the Redaction Board whether the material being reviewed has been previously published either in its entirety or partially or if it is being reviewed simultaneously by another journal. They also pledge to point out key bibliographical or material references that need to be cited in the work being reviewed and that may have been omitted by the author.
• Conflicts of interest / competing interests. Reviewers pledge to report whether or not they have personal or professional ties with the authors of the papers to be reviewed. If they do have these ties, they must refrain from contributing as anonymous reviewers or at any other stage of the publishing process.
• Reviewers do not know or have ties with the authors of the papers being reviewed, unless it is as a result of the exchange of documents handled by the OJS system. Nor shall reviewers know each other’s identity.
• Deadline for the review. Anonymous peer reviewers pledge to carry out their review activities within the time-limits set by If their work fails to meet the deadline, they must inform the journal immediately.
• Commitment to confidentiality. When the peer review ends, the reviewers shall refrain from communicating or disclosing their work and its results to persons outside of the journal.

Redaction Board

• The Redaction Board shall ensure complete confidentiality and anonymity between authors and reviewers at all times. If there is any communication between these two stakeholders in the publishing process, it shall be handled by the Redaction Board.
• Each issue shall be published and posted in official print, broadcast, and digital media.
• The Redaction Board guarantees transparency in all editorial processes (review, proofreading, editing, and publishing).
• The Redaction Board pledges to communicate effectively and on a timely basis with both reviewers and authors using formal and official channels, especially by email and the Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform.
• Publication of errata and corrections. The Redaction Board pledges to publish lists of errors and their correction (errata), amendments, and rectifications both in print and digitally.
• Every issue published shall be distributed in print and digitally on the journal’s web page (OJS), as well as in scholarly databases and social media.
• Selection of reviewers. Depending on the subject area of the submissions, the Redaction Board shall obtain reviewers who are able to review them with the greatest rigor and skill.
• Disclosure and conflict of interest. Under no circumstances shall the sources, contents, or results of the research sent for review be used before said work is duly published, without the express consent of its authors. The Redaction Board shall refrain from making use of the above.
• Deadlines and timelines. The publishing process shall be carried out within the time-limits set by the journal in its Editorial Guidelines. Any deviation or delay in fulfilling said timeline shall be communicated to the authors.

 

Policy on transparency and conflicts of interest

Procesos: Ecuadorian Journal of History bases its transparency policy on the principle of good faith. In that regard, both its Editorial Committee and Redaction Board trust in the seriousness of the authors, as well as in the impartial and objective treatment of their work by the peer reviewers. It is understood that, by submitting their work to review by Procesos, the authors trust the reviewers and their decisions.

Any disputes that might arise shall be submitted to the journal’s Editor-in-Chief, who shall take the necessary actions to settle them.