Ethical code
Ethical Code of RiiTE - Interuniversity Journal of Research in Educational Technology is based on the "Code of Conduct and Best-Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors" (COPE) developed by the Committee on Publications Ethics (2011), as well as the principles of transparency and good practices of the Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association (OASPA). We have also taken into account the principles of the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) and CoARA (Coalition for Advanced Research Assessment) aligned with the principles of open science.
This ethical code uses generic terms following the recommendations of the Royal Spanish Academy (RAE) regarding inclusive language and criteria of readability and linguistic economy. The use of generics should not be understood as an excluding concept. The same principle applies to publications in our journal.
1. EDITORIAL RESPONSIBILITY
Acceptance of Articles
The editor is responsible for deciding which of the submitted works align with our scope and style requirements. The editor will evaluate manuscripts without considering the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors. Neither the authors' impact factor nor the impact factors of the referenced articles will be used as inclusion/exclusion criteria for the evaluation. The decision will be based on the quality of each work, its importance in generating knowledge, originality, clarity, and relevance to the specific field of our journal. Legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism or self-plagiarism will also be considered.
Editorial Flexibility
The journal establishes publication guidelines that facilitate both blind evaluation and article editing processes. However, criteria specific to digital publications and open science are taken into account to consider exceptions to article length limitations. There are no limitations on the number of tables or figures, and no restrictions on bibliographic references, while still considering the evaluators' assessments to ensure adherence to basic aspects of scientific communication.
Conflict of Interest
The editor and the editorial team commit to managing the article evaluation process by using anonymous versions and assigning evaluations that avoid conflicts of interest with authors who may be participating in the same research team or project mentioned in the article. Reviewers from the same institution or organization as any of the authors will not be assigned.
Commitment to Confidentiality
The editor and the editorial team commit to not disclose any information about submitted manuscripts, neither privately nor publicly. Communication with authors, reviewers, or editorial advisors will be limited to what is strictly necessary for the management of the evaluation and publication process. Once published, communication will be exclusively linked to the scientific dissemination of the journal and/or the article itself.
Neither the editor nor the members of the editorial team will use unpublished material presented in an article for their own research purposes.
Dissemination and Impact
The editorial board of the journal will actively contribute to promoting the scientific, educational, and social impact of the published works. This will be achieved through various means, including the journal's digital channels, distribution lists, advertising in specialized forums, and any other available resources.
2. RESPONSIBILITY OF REVIEWERS
Blind Review
The peer review process (conducted in RiiTE through a blind evaluation procedure) assists the editor and the editorial board in making decisions regarding the submitted work and serves as a tool for authors to improve their articles.
Availability
Any selected reviewer who does not feel qualified to evaluate the information presented in a manuscript or cannot meet the indicated deadline should promptly notify the editor and withdraw from the review process. This notification should be made in a timely manner to avoid delays in the evaluation of the article.
Objectivity Standards
Reviews should be conducted objectively and solely based on the quality criteria of the articles. Personal criticism of the author(s) is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly and provide solid and coherent arguments to support their decision. The use of impact factor criteria regarding the sources used will not be employed; instead, the focus will be on the quality of the work itself, considering aspects of diversity and inclusiveness in research.
Promoting Open Science
Reviewers should verify whether the manuscript contributes to knowledge and open science, including information on data publication, availability of research instruments for other researchers, and overall accessibility without restrictions on the internet.
Source Recognition
Reviewers should identify possible referenced works mentioned by the authors but not cited in the corresponding section. They should indicate whether observations or arguments derived from other publications are accompanied by the respective source. Reviewers should notify the editor of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript and any other published work they are aware of, as works indicating plagiarism or self-plagiarism will not be accepted.
Commitment to Confidentiality
Articles received for review should be treated as confidential documents. They should not be disclosed or discussed with others, except in extraordinary cases where it is in the best interest of the article's evaluation. In such exceptional situations, explicit authorization from the editor must always be obtained.
The information or ideas obtained through participation in the peer review process are also confidential and must not be used for personal or third-party benefit.
Conflict of Interest
Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest arising from competitive relationships, collaborations, or other connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the work. They should disclose any conflicts of interest and decline participation in the review process of the manuscript.
3. AUTHOR'S RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES
Ethical Guarantees for Authors
RiiTE guarantees authors that their works will not be evaluated based on metrics or relative impact factor criteria concerning participating researchers or the sources used. Diversity of roles and career stages, including those in early development phases, will be respected. Evaluation of articles will not consider project funding criteria or academic affiliation but will focus exclusively on the quality of the submitted works.
Article Submission Guidelines
Authors of research reports must ensure the originality of their works, which should not have been published or submitted to any other journal. They should provide an accurate description of the work conducted, as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Data must be accurately represented in the article. Sufficient details and references should be provided to enable other researchers to use the generated and shared knowledge. Fraudulent or deliberately inaccurate statements are unethical and unacceptable.
Studies Involving Human Participants
Works submitted to the journal involving the participation of human subjects must comply with specific ethical requirements. First and foremost, explicit consent from the participants must be obtained, ensuring they are fully informed about the relevant aspects of the research. Authors are also responsible for preserving the anonymity and protecting the privacy of the participants. In the case of research involving vulnerable subjects, explicit justification for their participation is required. Furthermore, a clear description of the recruitment strategy used to select participants is essential. These ethical requirements ensure respect for the rights and safety of individuals involved in the research.
Data Accessibility and Preservation
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data from their study along with the article for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data available to the public, if possible, in line with the principles of open science collaboration. In any case, authors must ensure the accessibility of such data to other competent professionals for at least ten years after publication (preferably through an institutional data repository or another data center), as long as the confidentiality, anonymity of participants, and legal ownership rights can be guaranteed. The authors of the article are responsible for ensuring that the information and raw data of the study do not present any ethical or legal impediments to scientific disclosure.
Originality, Plagiarism, and Source Recognition
Authors should only submit original works and appropriately cite the work and/or words of others. Publications that have influenced the nature of the presented work should also be referenced. Any indicator of plagiarism or self-plagiarism found by the editors or reviewers will result in the immediate termination of the review process, and the work will not be accepted for publication.
Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication
Submitting the same article to multiple journals is considered unethical and unacceptable behavior. Manuscripts that have been accepted or already published in other journals cannot be submitted. Additionally, articles that are currently under peer review in other journals cannot be submitted. However, authors retain the rights to their published material.
In case of publication, authors allow the use of their work under a CC-BY-NC license [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/], which enables others to copy, distribute, transmit, and adapt the work.
Authorship
Authorship should be limited to those who have made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, interpretation, and writing of the presented study. All individuals who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Collaborations that do not meet the criteria for authorship can be explicitly acknowledged in the acknowledgments section.
The responsible author ensures that all contributing co-authors are listed and that no uninvolved individuals are included in the author list. The responsible author also verifies that all co-authors have approved the final version of the work and have given their consent for publication.
For funded projects, all sources of financial support for the project should be explicitly stated.
Conflict of Interest
All authors must include a declaration revealing any financial or other conflicts of interest that could be interpreted as influencing the results or interpretation of their manuscript.
Disclosure
Authors should actively contribute to the dissemination of the published works through the use of available media, thereby contributing to the dissemination of scientific knowledge and the impact of the publication. In this regard, both scientific and educational and social impacts should be considered, promoting knowledge dissemination and transfer.
Relevant Errors in Published Works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, they have an obligation to promptly notify the journal's director or editor and cooperate with them to retract or correct the work through an erratum.
