Ethical Policy

ETHICAL PUBLICATION POLICY

The publication policies of Nexus journal are grounded in the principles of transparency and best practices for expert and specialized scientific and academic publications. Among other measures, it operates article selection through a double-blind peer-review system, maintains a prestigious editorial team, provides timely information and addresses authors' queries, offers clear information about the manuscript submission, evaluation, and publication process so that potential authors can prepare their submissions accordingly, and establishes a set of recommendations to ensure the editors' and reviewers' work is both fluent and rigorous. Additionally, it strives to prevent various forms of unethical behavior during the manuscript submission, review, and publication process. Nexus journal will select manuscripts for publication based solely on criteria of academic and scientific quality, ethical integrity, and thematic relevance. Under no circumstances will it accept any form of discrimination based on race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, ethnic origin, nationality, or authors' political views in manuscripts or during the selection process.

Below are the ethical requirements that Nexus considers to achieve the highest standards of transparency and rigor.

FOR AUTHORS

Three requirements define the authorship status according to the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Guide of 2001: significant and substantial contributions to the conception, design, acquisition, analysis, and interpretation of data; drafting the article or significant critical revision of its intellectual content; or decisive participation in approving the final version for publication (ICMJE, 2014). This guide also states that funding the research, overseeing the research group in general, or participating in data collection does not automatically define authorship. Considering this and following some recommendations from COPE on this matter, Nexus journal suggests the following guidelines to authors:

Ensure and clarify authorship with your team. Before submitting your manuscript to the journal, ensure that individuals who have contributed directly or indirectly to the research underlying your article understand the type of contribution they will have in the manuscript. Misunderstandings and unclear communication on this matter can lead to bitter disputes that can be avoided by clarifying credits within the publication beforehand. Authorship should be indicated in the article's heading. Acknowledgments, references to support staff, specialized technical personnel, contributors, and funding sources should be included in a final note when necessary.

Clearly define authors in the manuscript. Write the author's name followed by their title and institutional affiliation (e.g., Carlos Patiño Millán, School of Social Communication, University of Valle, Cali, Colombia), and not the role they played in the research (Project Director of Literature and Contemporaneity Research). Do not include individuals who played a non-authorial role in the research and manuscript creation: typists, funders, style correctors. If you have doubts about authorship status, consult the COPE website or review the regulations and authorship policies available at your institution.

Include email correspondence. Provide each author's email address to facilitate potential communication and correspondence with readers and those interested in your manuscript and academic work. Institutional email addresses are recommended. Personal email addresses may be used exceptionally.

Responsibilities of Author(s), Editors, Reviewers, and Conflict of Interests. It is imperative to avoid betraying readers' trust in a publication and the credit due to its authors, editors, and reviewers. To achieve this, the highest possible level of transparency and reliability must be maintained throughout all phases of the manuscript's public communication process. A significant factor contributing to scientific and academic production fraud and corruption originates from various types of conflicts of interest. The ICMJE urges addressing both actual, perceived, and potential conflicts of interest. Any situation that interferes with and alters the judgment of authors, reviewers, and editors regarding data, arguments, analysis, selection, and assessment of studies, and affects or undermines the communication of results, findings, and publicly relevant knowledge solely for private and personal benefits may be considered a conflict of interest. Authors, editors, and evaluators must avoid any formal or covert agreements with entities and individuals that may interfere, for financial, political, ideological, or institutional reasons, with the public communication of their studies and results. Likewise, personal rivalries and animosity unrelated to healthy competition in scientific research and academic life should be avoided. When authors, editors, and evaluators encounter serious indications of a conflict of interest, they must disclose it, and the Nexus journal staff will proceed to make inquiries to determine the appropriate steps to take, including, among others, the possibility of requesting involved editors to step aside from the editing process, reviewers to abstain from evaluation, or authors to withdraw the manuscript.

When submitting a manuscript to Nexus journal, the author must complete the Conflict of Interest Declaration Form.

Guarantees of originality, genuine and careful data, and prohibition of all forms of plagiarism. Authors of manuscripts submitted to Nexus journal ensure the originality of the work they submit. This means that the work has not been previously published and does not contain parts from other authors or excerpts from works published by the authors that are not rigorously and formally cited in the manuscript. The editorial system of the Universidad del Valle has technical procedures to verify and control plagiarism and inappropriate citations. In addition to ensuring the originality of the manuscript, authors confirm the veracity of the data, records, testimonies, and empirical material considered in the manuscripts. It is recommended to keep the files and empirical evidence for at least two years after the publication of the manuscript for verification purposes if needed.

Rigor in writing and citation of sources, organization of data, tables, figures, and references. Each manuscript submitted to Nexus journal is expected to have neat writing, complete and appropriate citation of sources, optimal numbering and organization of tables and figures, and a comprehensive list of references.

Contributing to the proper development of the editorial process. Once the manuscript is accepted, there is usually ongoing communication between editors and authors to make adjustments and improvements to the document before its publication. When an author identifies errors and inaccuracies in the manuscript, it is expected that they inform the editors promptly and provide the required information to make the necessary corrections. Updating data and literature, promptly examining editor and reviewer recommendations, addressing manuscript-related concerns or conflicts of interest, and addressing relevant observations on the document are part of the authors' responsibilities.

FOR EDITORS

Confidentiality and confidentiality of manuscripts. Manuscripts, as unpublished works, are documents that must be treated with the utmost confidentiality, neatness, and confidentiality. Providing partial or complete information about them to third parties prematurely can jeopardize the confidentiality of data, arguments, and ideas that authors have entrusted to the journal. Editors will not share information with third parties about manuscripts, authors' names, assigned reviewers, or reviewers' assessments. Of course, they will not accept the use and citation of manuscripts under evaluation or publication in any way. Editors will ensure that collaborators and reviewers are informed of the confidential and reserved nature of the material under their custody. Likewise, editors may never use manuscripts under custody before their formal publication. Unpublished, rejected, or postponed manuscripts will not be referred to under any circumstances. Nexus journal removes rejected manuscripts from its archives up to a maximum of three months after informing the authors that they will not be published. However, it will retain communications, forms, and documents that record authors' interest in publishing in the journal, evaluations, comments, and reviews to address possible and future contingencies, doubts, and queries. Reviewers' names will not be disclosed to authors or anyone else interested in them. Confidentiality will only be violated in very exceptional cases, such as when there are reasonable discussions of fraud, unclear authorship, suspicious data, or evidence of conflict of interest not reported in reviewers, editors, and authors. In such cases, authors, editors, or reviewers will be informed in advance about the situation.

Timely and on-time editorial work. The editors of the journal undertake to provide prompt and timely communication by accepting or rejecting submitted manuscripts, as authors require it to consider other publication options or make adjustments to their works. They will also communicate with reviewers when evaluation deadlines are approaching (memorandum) and when deadlines have passed. They will also promptly forward reviewers' assessments and comments to authors and maintain communication as deemed necessary with authors to ensure the adjustments and updates the manuscript requires before publication. (See Nexus Journal Editorial Process). The editor ensures the provision of all documentation and information required by reviewers to conduct a critical assessment and qualified judgment.

Editorial responsibility and conflict of interest. See section 4 Authors on this matter.

FOR REVIEWERS

Critically, constructively, and respectfully evaluate authors' manuscripts. Every manuscript is the result of sustained and creative effort that the author(s) estimate and appreciate. Respecting that effort and showing consideration for the authors' work is a primary duty of reviewers. Since knowledge production is always the product of joint deliberation, shared criticism, and collegial and peer reading, it is desirable to contribute during the manuscript review to maintaining a healthy climate of constructive exchange of ideas. Avoiding the use of terms that denigrate the manuscript and its authors, indicate deep contempt or mockery, or ridicule the arguments presented, not only are ethically unacceptable but undesirable as they fracture the basic conditions of healthy debate of ideas. Although not part of the journal's editorial team, the reviewer plays an important role in the final decision-making process at Nexus. Hence the importance of their work: an impartial, independent, and critical evaluation capable of weighing the achievements and limitations of the manuscript at hand. Their judgment is crucial. Peer review contributes to improving manuscripts, even in cases where the document is ultimately rejected. It also constitutes a valuable way of staying informed about works, ideas, and arguments in development within the academic and scientific community. Respectful review does not mean, of course, a non-critical review. Reviewers will not hesitate to accurately point out the bibliographic references of fundamental works not considered by the authors, possible plagiarism or use of inappropriate references, reuse of passages from previous texts by the same author, or presence of unreliable data and arguments, possible biases associated with conflicts of interest or insufficient literature review.

Timely and on-time work. Meeting deadlines for manuscript evaluation, recording observations in the Manuscript Evaluation Form, and requesting additional information required to improve their judgment and review of manuscripts are valuable conditions of a good reviewer. Reviewers may maintain communication with editors as often as needed to clarify any doubts, provide detailed assessments, or report on the progress of their work. When the reviewer believes they are not competent to evaluate the manuscript or knows they will not be able to do so on time, they will notify the editors immediately.

A significant and valuable, symbolically and socially recognized, but unpaid labor. Nexus journal, from the Universidad del Valle, will select peer reviewers of the highest possible quality, in the field of knowledge and topics considered convenient and of interest for the manuscripts. Since the reviewing process is a contribution that the academic and scientific community makes to other academics and scientists, in favor of a richer and more diverse sphere of deliberation, discussion, and dissemination of expert and specialized knowledge, and to avoid any transactional logic affecting the evaluation work, Nexus journal does not pay for reviewing work. Instead, it will certify and acknowledge, through written and official communication, the reviewers' good services.

Nexus journal attends, adheres to, and respects the bulk of the guidelines and principles established by COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics).