Ethical standards

Declaration of ethics

RChD: Creación y Pensamiento abides to ethical standards and good practices for the publication of its articles, which implies the definition of responsibilities for all the actors involved in its preparation, having an editorial team, a publishing committee and a board of evaluators with high academic level and experience in their areas of expertise, whose academic information, institutional affiliations and contacts are disseminated on the website rchd.uchile.cl; ensuring, in this way, compliance with the declared ethical standards.

Responsibilities of the editorial team

The editorial team ensures regularity in the processes and publication rules, especially during the course of the evaluation of the articles. It is the responsibility of the editorial team to evaluate the relevance of the material received in relation to the topic addressed in a particular call; compliance with the formal requirements set forth in the publication regulations; and safeguard the scope and diversity of points of view, within the framework of disciplinary interest, with the aim of avoiding arbitrary situations.

The editorial team must comply with the ethical standards of the journal and with all legal guidelines, including, but not limited to, those that do not allow defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism.

The editorial team will ensure the operation of the double-blind system, safeguarding the confidentiality of the information regarding the authors, data included in the article, analyzes performed or conclusions during the evaluation process.

Unpublished articles can not be used by the editorial team for other purposes and, if they need to be mentioned in relation to other studies, they agree to consult the consent of the authors.

Likewise, the members of the editorial team will not use for their own benefit any information that is presented in the articles or in the comments made by the peer reviewers. In case there is a conflict of interest of a member of the editorial team somewhere in the process, he will refer his work to another member of the team.

The editorial team will respond before any ethical conflict which result from submitting articles or complaints and warnings for the published articles, safeguarding the prestige of the journal, the authorship of the articles and the relevance of the published.

The editorial team will review manuscripts and make decisions about them regardless of the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, nationality or political ideology of the authors.

Responsibilities of the Scientific Committee

The Scientific Committee is made up of academics or professionals from the area of ​​Design and related disciplines. The members of the Scientific Committee are committed to maintaining confidentiality regarding their role and issues pertaining to the operation of the journal.

The members of the Scientific Committee assume the responsibility of ensuring the integrity of the editorial line through meetings with the Editorial Team, discussing the general quality of the publication and the relevance of the specific issues of each issue, favoring the positioning of the publication. journal in the academic fields.

In parallel, through its members, the range of contacts will be expanded, in order to attract more and better content to be arbitrated by the Peer Review Committee.

Additionally, the Scientific Committee may propose new permanent or circumstantial reviewers in relation to specific contents.

Responsibilities of the authors

When submitting material to the journal, all authors accept these ethical and publication standards. The articles undergo the process of evaluation by peers through the double-blind system, must be original and cannot be considered simultaneously for other publications.

The authors must guarantee that totally original works will be presented and that the text or materials that the authors have used makes reference to them correctly. Plagiarism in any of its forms is an unethical behavior that will not be tolerated by the magazine.

It is the responsibility of the author to authorize the use of images / photographs with intellectual property rights, and these should be sent, when necessary, with the article for evaluation.

In the case of articles with more than one author, all participants will commit a significant contribution to the definition of content and express recognition to those who have collaborated in the final result. Information that has been obtained by private means cannot be published without the consent from the person or relevant institution. The main author has the responsibility to include all co-authors and collaborators and ensure that all of them have reviewed and approved the final version of the document, consenting to its presentation to be published.

The authors will ensure accuracy in exposing their own ideas in their articles, differentiating them from the ideas cited; being the breach of this requirement, reason for rejection by the magazine. In case of data collected or produced by the author, the procedure used will be explained, the strategy and the process to reach them will be presented, their subsequent analysis and the conclusions derived from the study.

In general terms, an author should not try to publish identical materials in more than one magazine or another type of primary publication. The presentation of the same material in several journals and / or the publication of the same work in different journals is an unethical practice and should not be tolerated.

The sources of financing that have allowed the development of research or projects described in the articles, as well as any commitment that could influence the interpretation of the conclusions and reflections, will be expressly recorded by the authors, who will guarantee the transparency and veracity of this information. Private investigation (conversations, communications, third-party dialogue) is prohibited, except in cases of explicit written permission of those individuals (informed consent). Information collected through confidential methods, such as manuscript revisions or grant applications, is prohibited, except in the case of the explicit and written permission of the author providing such services.

All authors must disclose in their final manuscript any financial or other types of conflicts that could interfere with the results and interpretations of their research. All funding for the project must be disclosed.

In case of discovering the existence of a mistake in the publication of his article, the author must immediately inform the Director or editors, so as to amend by errata in the following number.

Responsibilities of the evaluators

The committee of peer evaluators is made up of professionals and academics specialized in different areas of the discipline, privileging a sense of diversity in terms of their origin and institutional affiliation.

The assignments of the articles to the evaluators are carried out in accordance with the criteria of the editorial team, without prejudice of which, the evaluators may request the reassignment of those articles whose contents do not conform to their area of ​​specialization.

The evaluators will ensure confidentiality of the content of the articles under review, favoring objectivity. In case of conflicts of interest, the evaluator will communicate his restriction to the editorial team, so as to reassign the article to another reviewer.

Any manuscript submitted for review must be considered a confidential document. This manuscript should not be discussed or presented to third parties or individuals.

The reviewers commit to ensure the fidelity of the information contained in the articles and will notify if they warn of the omission of relevant sources, or if the work involves total or partial plagiarism.

The information contained in unpublished articles may not be used totally or partially by the reviewers, and if it requires to be cited by them, given their relevance to other studies, they must have the express consent from the authors.

Considering the time factor, the evaluators must inform the editor and reject the revision of an article in case they are not able to review the material in a timely manner, or, if they do not have sufficient knowledge about the subject of the article.

Criticisms should be made in a neutral manner and opinions should articulate their criticisms on the basis of reasonable arguments.

The reviewers must take into account the published material that has not been considered or cited in the article under review, as well as detect if there is any considerable similarity between the articles published and the manuscript that is under evaluation.

Reviewers should refrain from evaluating manuscripts that present a conflict of interest as a result of any possible connection, whether competitive, mutual, with institutions, companies, authors, or others.

Method of handling unethical behavior

The recognition of unethical conduct

When misconduct and / or unethical actions are identified, they should be reported to the Director and General editor.

Misconduct and unethical actions include, but are not limited to, the examples described here, such as plagiarism or falsification of research.

The informant of unethical conduct must offer sufficient information and evidence to initiate an inquiry. All complaints must be seriously considered and treated in a similar manner, until a corresponding result or agreement is achieved.

Inquiry

The editor is responsible for choosing the appropriate form of the inquiry and may request the advice from the Editorial Team, the Scientific Committee or the reviewer when making this choice.

The evidence should be gathered in a manner that avoids inflaming the situation and the proliferation of accusations.

Punishment

Notify the author or evaluator of a misunderstanding or misapplication of the ethical standards of the journal.

Writing a letter or statement addressed to the author expressing the unethical behavior and issuing a warning.

The publication of a formal observation with the details of the inappropriate behavior.

The publication of an editorial comment detailing the inappropriate behavior.

The withdrawal and formal elimination of the work in question from the journal, together with notifying the supervisor of the author or group of evaluators and the hearing of the publication.

Enforce a formal embargo on the author's presentations for a specified period of time.