1. Ethical Standards and Statement of Best Practices
La Notaría is an academic journal that publishes scientific works and is firmly committed to upholding ethical standards and best practices. The Editorial Committee is responsible for establishing and maintaining the following standards throughout the selection and acceptance process for submitted contributions, as well as for assuming the responsibilities arising from the publication process. The Committee is committed to ensuring the ethical and scientific quality of the journal.
2. Authors’ Responsibilities
Authors must adhere to the following obligations, as well as comply with the author guidelines and editorial standards available on the journal’s website.
Authors commit to submitting manuscripts that are not under consideration or previously submitted to other publications, and to subjecting them to an anonymous peer review process.
Research must be conducted in accordance with ethical standards and included in the publication in such a way that sufficient information is provided to allow academic replication. All authors must disclose the sources of funding that enabled the research and the achievement of relevant results.
Submitted articles must be original works. If authors have used the work and/or excerpts of others, these must be properly cited. Any form of plagiarism is contrary to these best practices and will not be accepted under any circumstances. Plagiarism is understood as literal or near-literal copying, or paraphrasing of another author’s text or research results.
It is not appropriate for an author to submit more than one paper describing the same research, unless it is a resubmission of an article rejected by another journal.
If authors become aware of a fundamental error or significant inaccuracy in their published work, they must notify the journal.
3. Editors’ Ethical Responsibilities
Editors must ensure the scientific and academic quality of the journal and are primarily responsible for legal matters related to intellectual property, copyright, infringement, and plagiarism.
The Editor-in-Chief must respect the intellectual independence of authors and consider all manuscripts submitted for publication, assessing each contribution objectively. The Editor-in-Chief is also responsible for ensuring that manuscripts undergo an anonymous peer review process. The Editorial Committee holds the final responsibility and authority for accepting or rejecting a manuscript.
Editors are responsible for selecting reviewers based on their expertise and reputation in the manuscript’s subject area, who will assess the scientific quality of the submissions. However, the Editorial Committee may reject submissions without external review if deemed inappropriate for the journal’s scope, research lines, relevance, or formal correctness. Articles are evaluated solely on their content, regardless of commercial interests and without discrimination toward the author.
The Editor-in-Chief must communicate review outcomes to authors without revealing reviewer identities, but will inform them of the criteria used in the evaluation.
Editorial Committee members and any other editors must not disclose information about a manuscript under consideration to anyone except those consulted for academic or scientific advice. Confidentiality must be maintained throughout the review process. Editors must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts if there is a conflict of interest due to competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors.
Unpublished information, arguments, or interpretations contained in a manuscript submitted to the journal may not be used in editors’ own research.
4. Reviewers’ Responsibilities
Reviewers must objectively assess the quality and originality of manuscripts, emphasizing the maintenance of scientific quality and standards. Reviewers assist editors in decision-making and may help authors improve their work.
Reviewers must alert editors to any substantial similarity between the manuscript under review and any other article or manuscript submitted or published elsewhere.
Reviewers should act appropriately, submitting their evaluation reports within the established timeframe. If a reviewer feels unqualified or unable to meet the deadline, they must notify the editor and excuse themselves as soon as possible.
Reviewers must treat manuscripts under review as confidential documents. They must not be shown or discussed with others except in exceptional cases, where consultation with others may be necessary for academic or scientific advice; in such cases, the identities of those consulted must be disclosed to the editor.
5. Corrections and Retractions
If any published data or information in the journal is found to be false, erroneous, misleading, or fraudulent, editors must inform the authors and await their response before making an editorial decision. If the response is unsatisfactory or absent, editors may decide to retract the publication following agreement by the Editorial Board.
La Notaría will address any claims or complaints regarding published content via email. Editors are committed to following up and proceeding with review and, if necessary, retraction.
When a retraction or correction is warranted, editors will be guided by the principles contained in the Guidelines for Retracting Articles Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).