Ethics in Research and Publishing

 

Edutec Journal adopts practices for good conduct in research and publishing, in accordance with institutionally constructed standards, in line with the declarations of external organizations to which it is a signatory or whose guidelines it freely embraces.

 

Statement of Endorsement of the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA)

Edutec Journal is a signatory to the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) and is committed to maintaining responsible editorial practices for assessing the quality of submitted and published works.

In this sense, the journal adopts the following practices, in line with said declaration:

• it offers integration via API with the citation counting services of Google Scholar, Crossref Cited-by and Scopus, to make article-level metrics available on the pages of each publication;
• encourages responsible authorship practices, verifying in editorial review and peer review the need for approval by the Research Ethics Board and provision of an Image Use Authorization Term, in the case of research with human beings. It also encourages the provision of information about each author's contribution to the research developed, preferably in the biographical section of the manuscript, according to the journal's model;
• does not restrict access to and use of the reference list. All references are made available for open access on the publication pages and in the metadata, and are also extracted to Crossref via API;
• does not limit the number of references. Citation of primary literature is always recommended, and the use of derived reviews is permitted as long as they are relevant to the research approach. Edutec Journal repudiates practices that aim to manipulate or mine citation metrics.

View signature.

 

Statement of Endorsement of the Council of Science Editors' (CSE) White Paper

Image: Council of Science Editors

Edutec Journal embraces the guidelines proposed by the Council of Science Editors' (CSE) White Paper, also known as Recommendations for Promoting Integrity in Scientific Journal Publications. The document was translated and endorsed by the Brazilian Association of Scientific Editors (ABEC) as Diretrizes do CSE para Promover Integridade em Publicações de Periódicos Científicos.

The guidelines provided in these documents freely offer direction for the journal's editorial policies and practices on the following matters, as detailed below.

Editorial Role and Responsibilities: the editorial team operates with independence from bias. We follow the CSE guidelines to ensure fair treatment for all authors. Our decisions are based on the scientific merit, originality, and academic and social relevance of the manuscripts.

Authorship and Author Responsibilities: authors are considered to be those who have made a significant contribution to the research, and they must be duly credited. We require that each author's contributions be specified in a dedicated section of the manuscript, following the model provided for submission. We require all listed authors to review and approve the final version of the manuscript before publication, ensuring collective responsibility for the work. Ghost, gift, or honorary authorships are strictly prohibited.

Peer Review Process: we consider the peer review process fundamental to assessing research quality. In accordance with CSE recommendations, we ensure confidentiality throughout the process via a double-blind review model. Our reviewers are instructed to provide constructive, impartial, and well-founded analyses, refraining from personal criticism and declaring any conflicts of interest that could influence their evaluation. Reviewers are selected based on their expertise related to the manuscript's topic.

Conflicts of Interest: to maintain transparency, we require all parties involved in the publication process – authors, editors, and reviewers – to promptly declare any potential conflicts of interest, whether they are of a personal, financial, academic, or other nature. This policy is aligned with CSE guidelines and aims to ensure that editorial decisions are not influenced by external interests.

Scientific Misconduct and Decision-Making: allegations of misconduct, such as plagiarism, piracy, data fabrication, or falsification, are taken very seriously. Such allegations should be sent to the journal's institutional email for proper handling. We follow the procedures recommended by the CSE to investigate these claims fairly and rigorously. Misconduct investigations may include notifying one or more authors, affiliated institutions, funding agencies, and/or a body with jurisdiction to investigate.

Corrections to the Literature: the integrity of the scientific record is a priority. We publish errata, retractions, and expressions of concern, as appropriate, when significant errors or misconduct are identified in published manuscripts. Our practices for correcting the literature follow the definitions and processes detailed by the CSE, ensuring that readers are clearly informed about the nature of the correction.

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion: the journal is actively engaged in promoting best practices for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in scientific editing and publishing. This involves a diverse and representative composition of our editorial team and reviewers, including individuals from different institutions and lines of research.

Social Media: social media platforms are used to enhance the dissemination of publications and promote access to scientific content. The journal employs strategies that involve inclusive communication and accuracy of the published content. Actions on social media are always approached with responsibility and awareness of their risks. Therefore, they are monitored by the editorial team and include the participation of authors to evaluate the content.

 

Statement of Endorsement of the Heredia Declaration: Principles on the use of Artificial Intelligence in scientific publishing

The Edutec Journal embraces the guidelines of the Heredia Declaration for the conscious and responsible use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in scientific research, editing, and publishing. In this regard, we provide the following guidelines:

For authors: authors may use AI as a work tool, always maintaining their responsibility for the content and transparency about its use.

• Authorship of scientific works is exclusively attributed to human beings. Language models or generative AI cannot be considered authors.
• It is essential to explicitly declare the use of AI at any stage of the research or text preparation. This declaration must include the AI model and its version, the date of use, how it was used, and which outputs generated by the tool were incorporated into the work. The AI model must be cited and referenced.
• Authors must filter and validate the accuracy of the information provided by AI, not assuming its responses are absolute. It is the author's responsibility to avoid plagiarism, misinformation, and the propagation of biases when interacting with AI models.
• The use of personal, confidential, or sensitive data in queries to AI models is prohibited without explicit authorization from the data owners.
• If third-party funding is received for the use of AI in the research or publication process, this must also be mentioned.

For reviewers: reviewers hold the responsibility for the review they issue, even with the assistance of AI tools during the manuscript evaluation.

• The responsibility for the review issued to recommend or not recommend the publication of an article lies with the person performing the evaluation. Interaction with AI does not replace the expert's judgment or their responsibility.
• If AI is used as a supplement in the evaluation process, the reviewer must communicate this fact to the editorial team. This communication must include the model's name, version, date of use, and the prompt(s) used in the evaluation.
• The reviewer must be able to explain how they interacted with the AI, the outputs they received from the tool, and how these outputs were considered in their comments and recommendations.

For editors: editors are responsible for the entire editorial process, ensuring transparency and ethics in the use of AI.

• The responsibility for the editing process always lies with the editor and their team. The use of AI does not replace the responsibility of the humans involved.
• Editors shall inform authors and readers when editorial or evaluation tasks were supported by the use of AI, reporting the model, version, date of use, and the task assigned to the tool.
• Editors will use open, high-quality, and reliable data, ensuring that AI makes legitimate use of the information. In its use, they will adopt strategies to prevent the propagation of biases and misinformation.