1. General criteria

• Permanent call for academic papers, reviews, and artistic/creative productions (except for calls to participate in dossiers with specific coordination, themes and deadlines).
• Manuscripts submitted must be original and not be simultaneously proposed for publication in another journal.
• Contributions for the Academic Section receive internal review by the Editorial Board. If approved, they are sent to external double-blind review. The manuscripts of the Reviews Section are evaluated, exclusively, by the Editorial Board.
• The internal review stage can take up to one (1) month and the external review up to three (3) months, depending on the availability of reviewers.
• The criteria under which a paper is published are its affinity with and its relevance for the editorial policies of the journal (see About the Journal).
• Compliance with the editorial standards provided for the submission of originals (see Guidelines for Authors).
• Positive review of the text by at least two (2) reviewers.
• Changes to the text according to the reviews.
• Disagreements with the recommendations made by the reviewers must be directed to the Editorial Board, which decides on the matter and its decisions are final.
• The final decision to accept or reject a text is reserved to the responsible editors and the Editorial Board, who base their decision on the corresponding external reviews.
• Texts that refer to groups belonging to Indigenous peoples (families, communities, organizations) that do not recognize Indigenous authorship neither show evidence of a participatory and/or consultation process will not be accepted; although this may reduce the amount of publications on Indigenous groups, it will allow for an increase in the quality of research carried out with Indigenous peoples, as well as the theoretical, methodological and epistemological relevance of these contributions.

(Content adapted from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajr.12834, Australian Journal on Rural Health).

• The journal adheres to the Code of Conduct and Best Practices established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE); elaborations intended for the Editorial Board, authors and reviewers. See Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and Code of Conduct for Journals Publishers.

 

2. Promotion of inclusive and non-sexist language (NSIL)

 

The use of language reflects political, cultural and social changes in contemporary societies. In particular, the persistence of linguistic sexism reinforces a set of stereotypes, prejudices and gender hierarchies, perpetuating the invisibility of women, gender-sex diversity and non-binary identities in multiple areas of social life. In this sense, a fundamental aspect is to promote awareness that, in the Spanish language, the use of the masculine as a “universal” grammatical category refers to a patriarchal system that is being deeply revised by numerous feminist and transfeminist spaces (academic and militant). Based on this the journal aims to promote writing that respects the diversity and integrity of people. Below are conceptualizations and reflections of interest:

 

Non-sexist language: This involves naming both men and women in order to make situations of gender inequality visible, analyze them and intervene to modify them. In this way, the presence of women is highlighted in activities from which they are traditionally excluded, ensuring their visibility. For example, when we talk about “male and female researchers” we reaffirm that women are protagonists in the scientific-academic system. In addition, this visibility opens the opportunity to talk about the representation and situation of women in various spaces. It thus becomes a claim for rights in each expression. When deciding how to use it, we must not forget that the use of non-sexist language based on splitting assumes a binary logic in which only the possibility of naming two gender identities (male-female) is being considered. Although it is not the ideal format to use in texts where we want to make diversity visible (non-binary people, gender fluid people, etc.), its use is appropriate in spaces where the representation of women is especially emphasized.

 

Gender-inclusive language: This has a broader connotation, as it is not limited to the representation of men and women, but rather opts for more neutral terms such as “people”, “citizenship”, “scientific community”, etc. In addition, it provides for the use of the asterisk, the e or the x in cases such as: “lxs esperamos” (we are waiting for you), leaving open the possibility of including other identities. It is suggested to define whether non-sexist language or inclusive language will be used —or their combinations— depending on the goal, the target audience, who we want to make visible or what possible differences we want to eliminate. In this way, if we want to make women visible, and enable their access to a space that they have not traditionally been able to access, it is not advisable to do so with a discourse that speaks neutrally of “people”, but rather it is pertinent to reinforce the presence of women in these spaces.

 

Gender identity: Many people describe gender identity as the feeling, recognition and experience of being a boy, an adult male, a girl, an adult woman, a non-binary gender, etc.; a circumstance that may or may not correspond to the sex assigned at birth. The classification assigned at birth is based solely on the sexual characteristics seen as determinants (reproductive system, chromosomes, hormones, etc.). In turn, gender identity is distinct from sexual orientation; therefore, the two aspects should not be uncritically combined.

 

Sexual orientation: Refers to the disposition to experience sexual, emotional, or romantic attractions toward men, women, non-binary people, etc. It also encompasses the sense of personal and social identity based on those attractions, the behaviors that express them, and belonging to a community that shares them. (Brief for American Psychological Association et al., as petitioners for Amici Curiae support, Obergefell v. Hodges, 2015, p. 7).

 

Extracted from Manual de comunicación no sexista del Ministerio de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación, Argentine Republic. https://www.apa.org/about/apa/equity-diversity-inclusion/language-guidelines)

 

3. Criteria for plagiarism

 

The following situations constitute plagiarism:

 

Direct plagiarism: The authorship is omitted and the text is not indicated with quotation marks. Minimal changes are made to another person's text and it is presented as original.

 

Complex plagiarism using a reference: The original authorship reference exists, but the source pages are indicated inaccurately. Paraphrasing in which extensive texts are summarized, but with very little or no indication that they correspond to paraphrases. Absence of quotation marks in words and phrases from the original text that are reproduced verbatim.

 

Plagiarism with loose quotation marks: This is committed when a textual quotation is continued to be reproduced once the quotation marks have been closed or when it is omitted that the previous sentences correspond to the same quotation.

 

Paraphrasing as plagiarism: Paraphrasing is done without annotating the original source. Paraphrasing is continuous and extensive, with no added material that allows interaction or enriches the information, even though the source is mentioned.

Academic papers —which require original thoughts and critical reflections on other people's points of view— become texts that do not rise above repetition. Paraphrased passages are not clearly identified.

 

Paraphrasing is not considered plagiarism when: It does not dominate the writer's work. It is used to allow the writer to critically interact with another person's points of view. The argument of the original text is rewritten in different words.

 

“Self-plagiarism” or recycling fraud: A work is changed in appearance and presented as if it were another work. The indication that the work is being recycled is omitted.

 

(Marta Eugenia Rojas Porras, Plagio en textos académicos, Revista Electrónica Educare, Vol. 16, N° 2, [55-66], ISSN: 1409-42-58, May-August, 2012, taken from Normas Editoriales de Quinto Sol, Universidad Nacional de La Pampa)

 

If plagiarism is detected, the evidence will be sent to the author and a response will be requested. If the response is not satisfactory, the manuscript will not be submitted for external review.