Ethics and bad practices statement

Letras Históricas is committed to promoting ethical conduct in scientific publishing and adheres to the principles set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors (https://publicationethics.org/resources/code-conduct).

The journal upholds the ethical principle of neutrality concerning the content of submitted articles, without prejudice toward religious, political, ethnic, gender-based, or any other ideologies that may generate controversy or debate.

Our editorial process is based on good faith. The Editorial Board of Letras Históricas trusts the integrity of authors and the impartiality of reviewers. Authors, in turn, must trust the fairness and professionalism of the editors and peer reviewers. The Editorial Board will ensure that editors, reviewers, and authors adhere to ethical principles throughout the editorial process. Below, we outline our ethical guidelines for the academic community.

For Authors

Articles submitted to Letras Históricas must be original and unpublished. Authors wishing to publish with us must sign a statement confirming that the submitted manuscript is original and has not been previously submitted or is under simultaneous review by another journal. This statement must be sent to the journal before the manuscript enters the peer review process.
Copyright and access. Authors retain copyright and grant Letras Históricas the right of first publication under the CC BY-NC 4.0 DEED license. Publishing in the journal is free of charge, and all articles are available in open access.
No multiple or redundant submissions. Submitting the same article to multiple publications is an unacceptable practice in academic research dissemination.
Publication frequency limitation. An author may not publish more than once in consecutive issues of Letras Históricas. A minimum period of two years must pass before an author may submit another manuscript for publication.
Respect for original sources. All references must be cited correctly, clearly, and completely.
Errors in published articles. If authors identify an error or inaccuracy in their published work, they must inform the Editorial Board and provide the necessary information for corrections or an erratum to be published.
Engagement with relevant literature. Authors must review and cite the most recent and relevant academic literature on their research topic.
Authorship declaration. All co-authors must determine the order in which their names appear and notify the journal accordingly. Letras Históricas does not accept ghost authorship or honorary co-authorship. Authors guarantee the inclusion of all individuals who made a significant scientific and intellectual contribution to the research. If necessary, the Editorial Assistant or Responsible Editor may request identification details for all authors. Changes to authorship after the peer review process is completed will result in disqualification of the article from publication.
No ghost authorship or pseudonyms. The submission of works under false names or pseudonyms is strictly prohibited.
Conflict of interest and disclosure. Authors must explicitly declare that no conflicts of interest have influenced their research results or interpretations. They must also disclose any funding received from research projects, universities, or civil society organizations.
Compliance with revisions. Authors must respond promptly to the editor's and reviewers' comments and implement necessary changes within the stipulated time.

For Reviewers

Contribution to editorial decisions. Reviewers commit to conducting critical and constructive evaluations following the highest standards of scientific quality.
Impartiality in blind peer review. Evaluations must be objective, and reviewers must refrain from making personal judgments. They must inform the editors if they identify substantial parts of the manuscript that have been previously published or are under review elsewhere. Reviewers should also suggest any key references the author may have overlooked.
Reporting similarities or duplicates. Reviewers must notify the Editorial Assistant or Responsible Editor if they identify any similarities between the manuscript under review and other published works.
Conflict of interest disclosure. If a reviewer has a personal or financial interest that could affect their objectivity, they must withdraw from the review process.
Anonymity. Reviewers will remain anonymous to authors and vice versa. They will also be unaware of the identity of the second blind reviewer.
Confidentiality. Reviewers must not disclose or retain copies of manuscripts under review or use their contents in any way.
Meeting deadlines. If a reviewer cannot meet the agreed deadline, they must inform the editors in advance.

For the Editorial Board

Honesty. The Editorial Board guarantees transparency in the evaluation, editing, and publication of all issues.
Confidentiality. The editorial team maintains reviewer and author anonymity throughout the entire process.
Responsiveness. All inquiries from authors, reviewers, or interested parties will be addressed promptly via email.
Corrections and clarifications. Necessary corrections or clarifications will be published on the journal’s website.
Dissemination. Published issues will be shared across repositories, databases, and social networks.
Publication process. Editors will carefully select the most qualified reviewers for each submission.
Institutional diversity. No more than 20% of the articles in each issue may be authored by researchers affiliated with the Universidad de Guadalajara.
Conflict of interest and disclosure. Editors may not use content from submitted articles in their research without the author’s written consent.
Timely publication. Editors are responsible for meeting publication timelines to ensure the prompt dissemination of scientific findings. The journal commits to a maximum of four weeks to decide whether a submission proceeds to peer review and a maximum of 12 weeks for completion of the double-blind review process.

On Editorial Misconduct

The following are considered editorial misconduct:

Accepting any form of bribe (monetary or in kind) to influence the acceptance of an article.
Failing to fulfill professional responsibilities, thereby harming the journal or its authors.
Rejecting a submission without valid justification or due to personal or political conflicts with the author.
Disrespecting colleagues, authors, or reviewers in cases of conflict or complaint.
Violating confidentiality by disclosing author identities.
Sharing journal-related confidential information without authorization.
Not addressing complaints from authors in an impartial and timely manner.
Attempting to bribe journal staff to influence a conflict resolution decision.
Refusing to comply with editorial or peer-review revisions.
Failing to sign the authorship declaration or copyright license.
Plagiarism in any form, including:

Direct plagiarism: Copying, translating, or reproducing work without authorization or citation.
Indirect plagiarism: Improper citation, paraphrasing too closely, or omitting essential references.
Reference plagiarism: Misattributing references or omitting key information.
Self-plagiarism: Republishing previously published work without proper citation.

Conflict Resolution and Penalties

Any individual—reader, author, or journal member—may report misconduct to the Editor. Reports must include sufficient evidence for an investigation.

Investigation process
- Minor infractions will be handled by the Editorial Assistant, with consultation from the Responsible Editor and Director.
- Severe cases will be escalated to the Editor-in-Chief.
- The accused party will have an opportunity to present their defense.
Penalties
- Written warning to the offender.
- Public notice in the journal.
- Suspension of publication rights for a determined period.
- Retraction of a previously published work.
- University-level disciplinary action, if necessary.