Ethical Principles

Research Integrity

Research integrity presupposes respect for ethical and legal principles in the elaboration, conduct and publication of research. Therefore, the journal ÁyR agrees with the publication of scientific articles resulting from research in a correct, honest, responsible and transparent manner and adheres to the Singapore Declaration on Scientific Integrity.

Authorship and Contribution

ÁyR considers an author to be a person who has contributed intellectually to the preparation of the manuscript submitted to the journal. Following the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the following criteria must be met in order to be considered an author:

To have participated in the conception and design, or in the acquisition of the data, or in the analysis and interpretation of the data of the work that has resulted in the article.
To have participated in the drafting or critical revision of the text.
To have approved the version that will finally be published.

Complaints and Appeals Policies

If authors or other actors associated with the ÁyR journal have any type of claim or appeal, they must proceed with the following steps:

Send an email to arbolesyrizomas@usach.cl, indicating the subject: claim or appeal.
Describe in the body of the email the points to be developed in the disagreement, along with evidence if the case so indicates. The claim or appeal must be clear, concrete and have sufficient data to demonstrate a possible breach of the journal's editorial ethics statement.
Attach a formal letter addressed to the journal indicating the reasons for the claim or appeal.

It is important to indicate that claims or appeals that are outside the scope of the journal, such as: personal complaints against authors, editors, evaluators or the editorial team of the journal, will receive a response indicating the reasons why the complaint is not considered to be within the competence of the journal. Furthermore, the journal refrains from carrying out the corresponding investigations when complaints or claims are presented in an offensive, threatening or defamatory manner.

In this situation, ÁyR will set up a complaints and appeals resolution committee made up of the director, editor or general editor, a representative of the advisory board, a representative of the scientific committee and a representative of the journal unit of the Scientific and Technological Research Department of the University of Santiago de Chile, to study the case. If it is due to legal reasons, it will be directed to the legal department of the University. Decisions will be made taking into account the recommendations made by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Journal Policy on Conflict of Interest

A conflict of interest is considered when the author has personal or academic relationships that may bias or affect his/her actions in the research and publication.

In the journal, authors must guarantee that their procedures and methodologies conform to the international ethical codes of scientific research in literary and linguistic studies, such guarantee will be stated in writing in the Letter of Declaration of Originality, Integrity and Assignment of Rights and in the declaration of conflicts of interest that appears in the OJS. This information will be considered when sending the article for preliminary review, making the author or authors fully responsible for the ethical violations in which they may have incurred within the research from which the article derives.

The members of the editorial and scientific committee may submit nominations for articles. However, in these cases, only one nomination per issue may be submitted. The impartiality of the review of the articles submitted by the members of the committees is guaranteed. The editor will be the person in charge of the normal course of the editorial process stated in the guidelines for submissions.

ÁyR will reject all those articles that implicitly or explicitly contain experiences, methods, procedures or any other activity that follow unethical, discriminatory, offensive, aggressive practices, etc.; or those that do not clearly express any type of conflict of interest, leaving their publication to the judgment of the Editorial Committee.

Journal Policy on Ethical Oversight

Fraud and violation of ethics in authors

In accordance with the guidelines established by COPE, authors who wish to send their works to Árboles y Rizomas are requested to comply with the following guidelines.

Present original research results that has not been previously published. Works that are redundant, duplicate, or multiple will not be accepted, nor will simultaneous or fragmented publications. Manuscripts must be written clearly and authors are recommended to submit them to a style review before submission.
Inform the editor if there are versions of the work that have circulated or are circulating in another journal or medium.
Include as authors of the work only those people who have made a relevant intellectual contribution to the study.
Refrain from including the following types of authors in your work: “ghost,” “gift,” and “guest.” People who did not make as important a contribution as the authors may be mentioned as collaborators in a note of thanks at the end of the manuscript.
Agree on the order of authorship, taking into account that the first author is the person who has made the most important contribution to the study.
Check that the study does not incur in plagiarism and that the sources are duly accredited (see definitions below).
Be aware that by submitting your work to the journal Árboles y Rizomas, you accept that it will be subject to a plagiarism review against works previously published by other authors or those of their own authorship. To verify the originality of the works, the similarity checking system (Crosscheck) will be used, which shows degrees of coincidence with previously published works. If there is suspicion that the study has been published in whole or in part in another language, the work will be examined and its originality will be verified.
Use no more than 10% of the total citations in the manuscript for self-citations.
Include a maximum of 10% of self-citations in the entire work.
Confirm at the time of submission that the identity of the study participants remains anonymous and confidential. The use of pseudonyms or codes is recommended.
Refrain from committing acts of defamation, fraud or getting involved in conflicts of interest.
Maintain communication that is professional and respectful with the editor.
Refrain from sending other works to the journal before there is an editorial response regarding the first submission.

Fraud and violation of ethics in peer reviewers

According to COPE guidelines, in general terms, it is the duty of the reviewers:

Based on their experience, the reviewers will support the Editor in the process of evaluating and selecting articles.
Ensure that the evaluation process is confidential and not share the information used or produced as part of the evaluation.
Do not use the content of the manuscripts for purposes other than the evaluation.
Prepare quick, accurate evaluation reports, with kind, impartial and justifiable comments. Inform the Editor if you suspect unethical conduct.
Inform the Editor if you have read or evaluated a manuscript or article with similar characteristics that has been previously published or disseminated by another journal.
Make comments anonymously. In case anonymity is not possible, inform the Editor.
Inform the Editor when you cannot deliver the evaluation within the established deadline and do not accept to be an evaluator of a manuscript when you do not have the necessary time or the topic is not within your area of specialization.
Propose or recommend evaluators when you consider that you will not be able to fulfill the requested activities.
Refrain from issuing opinions in favor or against the publication of a manuscript based on your own beliefs or philosophies.
Use academic, appropriate and cordial language when preparing the evaluation report.
Maintain an impartial, academic and objective position at all times during the evaluation process.
Avoid making comments directly to the author or authors of the manuscript.
Make comments or recommendations with academic, appropriate language and supported by bibliographical references.
Refrain from evaluating manuscripts that come from authors with whom you maintain friendship or professional relations.
Refrain from making public, through any means, data or information contained in the manuscript.
Request authorization from the Editor when you need to include the opinion or recommendations of another specialist in the evaluation.

Procedure for fraud or violation of ethics

Misconduct affecting ethics in research or publication may be identified by editors, the editorial or scientific committee, peer reviewers, the audience or other persons who come into contact with or serve the journal. The editor will be responsible for receiving and managing all cases by applying protocols guided by COPE.

The editor must follow the guidelines recommended by COPE and notify the Electronic Academic Journals Unit of the Scientific and Technological Research Directorate (DICYT) of the University. If the complaint is prior to publication, but is not serious, the authors will be notified so that they can present their apologies in writing. The editor will inform the authors of the final decision. If the violation is serious, the editor will reject the article and notify all those involved in the process. If the complaint is made after publication, but is not serious (minor errors in the article), an errata will be published in the next issue of the journal. If the fault is serious, the article will be retracted and all those involved will be notified of the measures taken by the journal, after consulting the relevant bodies and activating COPE guidelines.

Correction and Retraction Policies

ÁyR will consider retractions, corrections or expressions of concerns about its publications according to the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). In these cases, the regime of rules and control mechanisms for scientific communication will depend on the type, severity and consequences of the inaccuracy detected. The purpose of this mechanism is that the changes are transparent and the integrity of the academic record be always guaranteed.

a) Errata

An errata notice will be issued when it is necessary to correct an error or omission made by the journal after publication that may affect the publication record or the reputation of the authors or the journal, but where the scholarly integrity of the article remains intact.

In these circumstances:

The article will be corrected.
An endnote will be added to the article with reference to the erratum notice.

b) Corrections

A correction notice will be issued when it is necessary to correct an error or omission made by the authors that affects the publication record or the reputation of the authors or the journal, but where the academic integrity of the article remains intact.

In these circumstances:

The article will be corrected.
An endnote will be added to the article with reference to the correction notice.

c) Retractions

A notice of retraction will be issued when a major error invalidates the conclusions of the article, or when there has been research misconduct or publication misconduct. Authors may request retraction of their articles if their reasons meet the criteria for retraction.

Retraction will be considered:

- If there is clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g., data fabrication or image manipulation) or error (e.g., miscalculation).

- If the findings have been previously published elsewhere without proper cross-referencing, permission, or justification (e.g., cases of redundant publication or duplicate publication).

- Whether the research constitutes plagiarism.

- If there is evidence of fraudulent authorship.

- If there is evidence of unethical research and violations of professional ethical codes.

When a decision has been made to retract an article:

An 'article retracted' watermark will be added to the published version of the article.
Article retracted: [article title] will be placed before the article title.
A separate retraction statement, entitled 'Retraction: [article title]', shall be published and linked to the retracted article. This note shall be signed by the editors of the journal.
The retraction statement will be paginated and assigned a DOI.

Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) as a Tool for Article Writing

Authors should be transparent when using chatbots and provide information on how they were used. Given that the field is currently evolving rapidly, authors who use a chatbot to help them write an article should state this fact and provide full technical specifications of the chatbot used (name, version, model, origin) and the method of application in the article they are submitting (query structure, syntax). This is consistent with the recommendation of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) to acknowledge writing assistance and the Heredia Declaration.

Authors are responsible for the work done by a chatbot in their article (including the accuracy of what is presented and the absence of plagiarism) and for proper attribution of all sources (including material produced by the chatbot). Human authors of articles written with the help of a chatbot are responsible for the contributions made by the chatbots, including their accuracy. They must be able to claim that there is no plagiarism in their article, including text produced by the chatbot. Human authors must ensure that there is proper attribution of all cited material, including full citations. They should state the specific query function used with the chatbot. Authors should search for and cite sources that support the chatbot's claims. Since a chatbot may be designed to omit sources that oppose the views expressed in the texts (written or oral) generated, it is the authors' duty to find, review, and include such opposing views in their articles.

Editors and reviewers should specify, both to authors and among themselves, any use of chatbots in the evaluation of the manuscript and the generation of revisions and correspondence. If they use chatbots in their communications with authors and each other, they should explain how they were used.

Árboles y Rizomas Journal adheres to the Heredia Declaration on Principles on the use of artificial intelligence in scientific publishing.