Prospectiva - Instrucciones a los autores

ISSN 22389-993X
online version

DOI: 10.25100/prts

INSTRUCTIONS TO AUTHORS

Focus and Scope
Form and preparation of manuscripts
Declaration of ethics and transparency

PROSPECTIVA

Prospectiva is an open access scientific journal that publishes on a continuous basis, with two issues per volume (year). Its purpose is to validate and disseminate original articles and literature reviews, both in English and Spanish, focused on the field of Social and human sciences. The main topics addressed by the journal include:

Social Work
Social Intervention
Social Thought
Contemporary Social Work

Submitted manuscripts undergo a rigorous double-blind peer review process, with the participation of active researchers and experts in the topics covered. The journal serves as an international forum for researchers, university professors, undergraduate and graduate students, as well as for any reader interested in learning about the latest research and debates in the areas of Social Work and Social Intervention.

All articles published in Prospectiva are immediately available in open access, in PDF and HTML formats. The journal follows the “diamond” publication open access model, which means that no charges are applied to authors at any stage of the publication process (no article processing charges) as it is financially supported by the Universidad del Valle University Press and the Faculty of Faculty of Humanities, School of Social Work and Human Development.

The journal uses the Creative Commons Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 4.0 (Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International) for all its articles.

Peer Review Process

Prospectiva considers that the evaluation of manuscripts is a fundamental and unavoidable part of the publication process of a scientific journal. Also, its evaluation policy is based on some ICMJE recommendations such as timeliness, peer review and integrity, as reference criteria that supports the entire decision-making process of which manuscripts are included in the journal editions and which are not.

Likewise, in order to guarantee the greatest possible independence on the part of independent reviewers in the reading of manuscripts, the journal adopts the “double-blind” peer review system in which the identities of both authors and reviewers are kept confidential throughout the entire process.

Now, specifically, the evaluation of manuscripts in the journal is carried out according to the following stages:

Editorial review. Manuscripts submitted to the journal undergo an editorial review. This review involves checking that the authors have correctly provided the necessary documents to formalize the submission to the journal. Subsequently, the manuscript is checked using an anti-plagiarism software. If problems of originality or any potentially improper use are detected, the authors will be informed.

If no problems are found in the manuscript, the editors will evaluate whether the manuscript meets the required quality standards to be sent to a full external peer review process. In this phase, the editor examines the structure of the manuscript, the bibliography, the most relevant conceptual and methodological aspects, as well as its compliance with the thematic focus of the journal or with the specific issue to which it has been submitted. If everything is in order, the manuscript will be assigned to external reviewers; otherwise, the authors will be informed about the non-acceptance of the manuscript or about the need for corrections before moving to the next stage.

Invitation of reviewers. The journal will be responsible for identifying and inviting reviewers for each manuscript approved for review, based on their academic background, research experience, the subject area of the article, and recent relevant publications of the prospective reviewer.

The time frame for completing the review will depend on the complexity of the manuscript topic or specific circumstances that arise during the review. However, the journal will recommend a deadline of 2-4 weeks, with the possibility of extension if necessary. If a reviewer fails to deliver the requested report, the editor may reassign the manuscript to another reviewer.

Evaluation criteria. The journal uses a form designed to guide the evaluation of manuscripts (download the form here). This form allows both quantitative and qualitative assessment of the manuscript. Formal aspects such as structure, quality of language, use of figures and tables, as well as substantive elements related to theory, methodology, depth of analysis, relevance and timeliness of the bibliography, and the significance of the results or conclusions will be evaluated.

The evaluation of each manuscript will also depend on its type, whether it is an original research article, a review of the literature, a discussion article or an analysis of current trends, among other types of manuscripts defined by the journal.

Evaluation outcomes. The outcomes of a peer review process can be classified into four categories:

1) Approved without corrections
2) Approved with minor corrections (of form or format)
3) Approved with significant corrections (substantive and form)
4) Rejected

The editors will be responsible for reviewing each of the comments received and consolidating a response to the authors. Authors are free to express to the editor their disagreement with the result of the review, always based on academic or scientific arguments or evidence to support their position.

However, the journal is not obliged to reconsider its decision, although the claims will be evaluated to determine if they are justified and if it is necessary to request clarifications to the reviewers or even call a new reviewer, if the editor considers that there is some kind of bias or assessment that does not do justice to the manuscript.

Corrected versions. Once the responses of the two or three reviewers have been collected, the journal will issue a detailed result to inform the authors. Articles accepted with the condition of being corrected should be returned along with a response letter detailing the changes made and addressing each of the reviewers' comments. These corrections will be reviewed again by the reviewers, and based on their approval or final recommendations, the editor will make a final decision on the manuscript.

If a corrected manuscript still has flaws previously noted by one or more reviewers, authors will be given an additional opportunity to make corrections. If the deficiencies are not satisfactorily resolved, the manuscript may be rejected at this point. Likewise, failure to submit a corrected version within the deadlines agreed upon with the editor may result in rejection, unless an extension for corrections is requested.

Timelines. On average, the complete evaluation cycle for a manuscript that passes all phases of the process takes approximately three months. If difficulties arise in finding available reviewers or delays occur in the delivery of reports, the journal will take the necessary steps to reassign manuscripts and notify authors.

Requests, complaints or appeals. In case of disagreement with any evaluation result, the process, or any particular request, authors are asked to communicate directly with the journal mailbox. These requests will be evaluated by the editors or by the editor-in-chief and will proceed according to the analysis of each case.

Form and preparation of manuscripts

Submissions.

The submission of manuscripts to the journal should be managed through the Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform. Interested authors should request the creation of a user account at revista.prospectiva@correounivalle.edu.co, sending the basic data: names, surnames, affiliation, notification e-mail and ORCID, together with the complementary documents to the submission (Letter of Commitment, Declaration of Conflict of Interest, Assignment of Intellectual Property Rights):

Manuscript submissions to the journal's e-mail will not be accepted, nor will they be processed by this means. The author may contact the journal's e-mail address in case of any problem in uploading files to the platform, so that the Editorial Coordination can resolve the incident.

Originality.

The journal publishes original papers that have not been previously published in other journals or publishers, and whose publication rights have not been compromised. Authors should avoid submitting articles that have been published by other formal means.

Likewise, the unauthorized use of material from other sources such as previously published texts, images or graphics is not allowed. Authors are urged to be careful not to infringe copyrights and to refrain from using protected works without permission, with special attention to images, figures or tables, since such works do not fall under the right of citation (it is not enough to cite the source to avoid infringement of copyright).

Similarity check.

Once the manuscripts meet the documentary requirements to enter the review process, they will undergo an evaluation with an anti-plagiarism software. This tool will help to identify similarities or possible misuse of other sources. If problems are detected, authors should make clarifications or corrections; otherwise, the manuscript may be rejected for originality or misuse of other copyrighted works.

Simultaneous submissions and ethics. Authors must declare in the letter of commitment that the manuscript has not been simultaneously submitted to another journal or publisher for publication. Authors must wait for the journal's decision before submitting the manuscript to another publication, in case it is rejected.

In addition, authors must certify that the manuscript has been prepared according to ethical criteria, respecting copyright and applying principles of scientific integrity. Any misconduct in this regard will be a reason for rejection by the journal or could lead to a retraction.

Digital identity (authors and institutions).

ORCID registration is a mandatory requirement for all authors. Prospectiva will not process manuscripts from authors who are not registered in ORCID. Registration can be done through the following link: https://orcid.org/register

In the ORCID profile, the Publisher requires three fields to be completed and publicly available: Employment, Education and qualifications and Works.

In addition, authors must provide the ROR (Research Organization Registry) of the institutions with which they are affiliated or of which they are employed or which are involved in funding the research from which their manuscript originates. The ROR can be found here: https://ror.org/

Authorship

In compliance with the ICMJE recommendations, the journal adopts its definition of authorship, urging the avoidance of inappropriate practices such as “gift authorship” or unjustified inclusion/exclusion of authors. The four requirements that define authorship, it is reiterated, are the following:

1. Making significant contributions in the conception, design, acquisition, analysis or interpretation of data.
2. Participate in the drafting or critical revision of the work with relevant intellectual content.
3. Approve the final version of the manuscript for publication.
4. Be responsible for all aspects of the work and be available to answer questions about its completeness and accuracy.

Authors must meet these criteria before submitting a manuscript to avoid inappropriate inclusion or omission of authors.

Corresponding author

In cases where a manuscript has more than one author, it is necessary to designate a corresponding author. The corresponding author will be in charge of maintaining communication with the journal during all stages of the publication process: editorial review, peer review, editing, form and substance corrections, preparation for production, style correction, design and layout, as well as post-publication follow-up.

The corresponding author must provide his/her unique bibliographic name, ORCID, current institutional affiliation, e-mail and also a physical institutional (not personal) correspondence address, with the appropriate nomenclature (street/career), including the specification of city and country.

Institutional affiliation

All authors of a manuscript must declare their institutional affiliation, which may include the specific academic area (e.g. department, faculty, school), the name of the main institution (such as university or research centre), the city, the country and, preferably, an institutional e-mail address.

If authors wish to include more than one institutional affiliation, they may do so. Each affiliation should be numbered in superscript, and if several authors share the same affiliation, the corresponding number should be linked to each author. For example:

John Smith ^1,2, Sandra Perez ², Laura Jones ³, Michael Rodriguez ^1,3

¹ First affiliation, city and country.
² Second affiliation, city and country.
³ Third affiliation, city and country.

However, it is recommended, as far as possible, to select only one main affiliation, especially the one that is directly related to the manuscript, such as the funding institution of the research project from which it originates.

In case an author wishes to change his/her affiliation after submission of the manuscript, a letter explaining the reasons for the change should be submitted. This letter must be endorsed by a legal representative or an authority from the previous institution, confirming that no proprietary rights have been compromised through any specific project or funding.

Each request for a change of affiliation will be reviewed individually by the journal, which will make the final decision. Failure to adequately justify the change may prevent publication of the manuscript.

Open Access

The journal subscribes to the open access movement and the principles of the Budapest Declaration of 2002, with its subsequent updates (BOAI10, BOAI15, BOAI20: https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/), which aims to make refereed scientific knowledge accessible, at no cost to users and readers, through the internet, and to benefit the development of science, knowledge and the solution of problems facing humanity, in its different societies and cultures.

Below, we list some issues related to funding, copyright, access and preservation of the content published by the journal, in line with open access and open science:

Charges for authors and access

Prospectiva does not impose any charges on authors at any stage of the publication process. Publishing in the journal is completely free of charge and no APCs (Article Processing Charges) are applied.

Furthermore, the journal has no embargo periods; all approved articles are immediately available in open access, following the ‘diamond’ model, with funding coming from the Universidad del Valle, which is a public institution, and its University Press.

Copyright and Creative Commons licenses

Authors grant the journal and Universidad del Valle the economic rights over accepted manuscripts, but may make any reuse they deem appropriate for professional, educational, academic or scientific reasons, in accordance with the terms of the license granted by the journal to all its articles.

Articles will be published under the Creative Commons 4.0 BY-NC-SA licence (Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International).

Digital preservation

The journal and Univalle University Press guarantee the long-term preservation of all published content, ensuring that issues and volumes can be retrieved and accessed, even if the editorial project is ever stopped. This is done in accordance with information security policies and the maintenance of electronic platforms.

The catalogue of works and the University Press' collection of scientific journals are part of the university's intellectual heritage, contributing to the validation, dissemination and preservation of knowledge in various disciplines.

The issues and volumes of the journal are included in the international digital preservation project of Clockss. For more information: https://clockss.org/digital-archive-community/participating-publishers/

Self-archiving

Prospectiva allows authors to self-archive the final version of manuscripts published by the journal. However, it is requested that wherever the published article is deposited or self-archived, the full reference is included, together with its respective DOI (Digital Object Identifier), so that readers can access the article directly on the journal's official website if they wish to do so.

Requirements to formalise the submission

Below, you can download the forms suggested by the journal to formalise the submission of any manuscript. Please read it, complete it in its entirety and upload it to the platform as an attachment to the original manuscript; please remember that in cases where a signature is required, the document must be read and signed by all authors:

Author and article identification form
Letter of assignment of rights and commitment to publication

If your research poses any risk to humans or non-human living beings, if it was approved by the ethics committee of your institution or if informed consents were processed, please indicate this in the Letter of Commitment and send all these supports as attachments, also through the platform

Declaration of ethics and transparency

Ethics

Prospectiva follows three main sources in its ethics and scientific integrity policy:

COPE: The journal has as benchmarks the principles, good practices and flowcharts and case studies of the Committee on Publication Ethics in its policy and as a guide on how to proceed in the event of any episode of suspected misconduct or violation of the principles of ethics, bioethics and scientific integrity: https://publicationethics.org

ICMJE: The recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, despite being focused on biomedical and health publications, are considered as a reference for the journal in terms of the broad, detailed perspective it gives on the publication process of a scientific journal and the good practices that should guide the conduct of editors, authors and reviewers: https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/

Singapore Declaration: This document establishes the principles and responsibilities that should be considered as the frame of reference for research integrity and is of importance to the journal, as it is a frequent means of publication of original research in its field: https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2011.557296

In addition to these guidelines, the journal specifically adopts COPE's 16 principles of transparency and best practices, applying them in its day-to-day management and decisions in the face of ethical dilemmas. These principles are detailed below:

Content of the journal

1. Name of the journal: the name of the journal is clear and has not been modified throughout its history.

2. Website: all information related to policies, processes, procedures and editorial structure is published in full on its website, in a clear and truthful manner

3. Editorial schedule: the periodicity (continuous publication) of the journal and the number of issues per year are detailed.

4. Archiving: digital preservation of all contents and technological stability of the journal is ensured

5. Copyright: the relationship between the journal and the authors with respect to the publication of articles accepted under an assignment of economic rights is clearly specified.

6. Licensing: the journal uses the Creative Commons 4.0 BY-NC-ND license and establishes it in its policies.

Editorial practices

7. Publication ethics: the journal details its ethical references and provides guidelines on authorship, conflicts of interest, copyright, scientific integrity, corrections and retractions.

8. Peer review: there is a structured review process, based on the “double blind” system, described in a specific section.

9. Access: the journal is of immediate open access, as mentioned in its policies.

Organization

10. Editorial and management: it is clearly specified which institution publishes the journal and its link with Universidad del Valle

11. Editorial and scientific committee: the data of the researchers that integrate the committees or act as editors are transparent and can be consulted from the journal's page, hyperlinked to their ORCID profiles

12. Editorial team: the information of the editorial team is complete, accurate and updated in a timely manner.

Business Practices

13. Costs for authors: the journal follows a diamond open access model, so no fees are charged to authors, which is duly specified on the website

14. Other income: the journal is financed by public resources, the publishing house and the Universidad del Valle

15. Advertising: the journal does not advertise commercially, given its academic and scientific focus.

16. Direct marketing: the journal occasionally contacts researchers, guest editors and reviewers to collaborate ad honorem in the evaluation of manuscripts or special issues. This contact is not for commercial or monetary purposes.

Confidentiality

The journal handles original and unpublished manuscripts as well as personal and professional information of its collaborators. Therefore, all this information will not be shared with third parties and will be used only for the proper development of the journal's management processes throughout its publication cycle.

Likewise, in the case of peer review, reviewers are asked to handle with absolute integrity and responsibility the data and contents of the manuscripts entrusted to them, since they are original manuscripts, not yet published, whose information, in the evaluation phase, belongs to their authors and funding institutions. Any improper use by a reviewer or if it is identified that information from a manuscript has been disclosed or used improperly, will be considered as unacceptable and unethical behavior, and we will proceed to request explanations and inform their employer.

Likewise, the journal, following a “double-blind” evaluation system, will reserve the identity of the parties involved to prevent such conditions from being violated and to allow manuscripts to be read with complete independence. The identity will not be revealed at any time except at the explicit and justified request of the parties involved.

Conflicts of interest

The journal asks all its collaborators (authors, reviewers, editors and members of the editorial team) to declare with transparency any type of conflict of interest that may affect their judgment or approach regarding a manuscript that is being submitted to the journal. Authors are required to declare their conflicts of interest, and the same applies to reviewers when evaluating a manuscript. Editors and committee members are also encouraged to express or declare any potential conflict that may arise in the evaluation or management of the publication of a manuscript, in order to avoid affecting the proper development of any process or biasing a result.

Use of artificial intelligence

The journal adheres to the recommendations of the Heredia Declaration for the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in scientific editing and publishing: https://doi.org/10.15359/ree.28-S.19967

Likewise, all authors who use AI in their work are asked to take into account two fundamental criteria:

1. Responsibility. AI cannot be considered as a co-author of the manuscripts submitted to the journal; AI is a tool, not a co-author. All the contents of the manuscript, its data, its structure and sections, its coherence, its argumentation, its analysis and its reliability are the sole responsibility of the authors and they will be fully responsible for the quality, veracity and scientific integrity of each manuscript.
2. Transparency. Any use of AI in a manuscript must be declared and explained in detail how it has been used either in the processing or analysis of data or in the elaboration of its contents. Concealing the use of AI tools will be considered unethical and will be grounds for rejection of a manuscript at any stage of the publication process.

Authorship

1. Making significant contributions in the conception, design, acquisition, analysis or interpretation of data.
2. Participate in the drafting or critical revision of the work with relevant intellectual content.
3. Approve the final version of the manuscript for publication.
4. Be responsible for all aspects of the work and be available to answer questions about its completeness and accuracy.

Authors must meet these criteria before submitting a manuscript to avoid inappropriate inclusion or deletion of authors.

Changes in the author group

Any changes in the author group must be fully justified. Preferably, changes should be avoided, but if necessary, authors should send a letter to the editor with the explanation, signed by all co-authors and the affected author. The journal will check with each co-author to ensure consensus.

Non-consensual changes in authorship can lead to serious ethical problems, and even legal implications. If not properly resolved, the journal reserves the right to cancel the publication process.

Corresponding author

In manuscripts with multiple authors, a corresponding author should be designated, who will be responsible for interacting with the journal at all stages of the editorial process. This author should provide a unique name, ORCID, institutional affiliation, e-mail and institutional physical address.

Final declarations

In the interest of ensuring that the journal's ethics policy is reflected in the final published versions, all manuscripts will include final declarations, most of which are mandatory in nature. These statements are described below:

Author contributions (mandatory for co-authored articles)

The contributions of each author must be clearly recorded according to the CRediT taxonomy, which includes 14 criteria to identify the roles played. Example:

Juan Suarez: conceptualization, formal analysis, research, resources, supervision, writing (original draft), writing (revision/proofreading).

You can consult the CRediT taxonomy at: https://credit.niso.org.

Funding (mandatory)

Any funding received by the authors must be declared, or, failing that, the absence of funding must be indicated.

Conflicts of interest (mandatory)

Authors must declare any conflict of interest that may have influenced the research or the contents of the manuscript, complying with the ICMJE format provided by the journal.

Ethical implications (mandatory)

If the research involves personal information, animal or human experimentation, or any other relevant ethical issues, these should be declared, and, if necessary, evidence of ethical approval or informed consents should be provided. Also, these ethical implications should be mentioned in the methodology of the manuscript, explaining how they were taken into account in the development of the research.

Acknowledgments (optional)

The authors may include acknowledgements to persons or institutions that have contributed significantly to the research or to the publication of the manuscript. However, since this is an acknowledgment rather than a dedication (as is sometimes included in graduate work or books), acknowledgements of a private, personal or general nature will not be accepted; acknowledgements should acknowledge the contribution of third parties who have actually contributed to or facilitated the research or the preparation of the manuscript.

Plagiarism and other wrong practices

Wrong practices such as plagiarism, self-plagiarism, redundant publication, text recycling and salami-slicing, fabrication or falsification of data, simultaneous submission, use of artificial intelligence without being declared, among other wrong practices, will be monitored by the journal and if identified, it will be a reason to reject outright any manuscript, at any stage of the process.

All cases of probable wrong practices will be handled according to COPE recommendations; that is, explanations will be requested from the authors or, failing that, the case will be escalated to the employer or institution to which the authors are affiliated, and once the evidence is collected and contrasted based on the authors' explanations, a decision will be made.

The journal will, of course, use support software to detect certain wrong practices such as plagiarism, in such case through the Turnitin tool.

Warning or suspicion of wrong practices

The journal encourages its contributors to communicate directly any concerns or doubts that arise in the face of evidence or suspicion of a wrong practice, either in a manuscript that is just under evaluation (if as a reviewer or editor you suspect something improper) or that has already been published (if as a reader you identify an ethical problem).

Any communication, complaint, suspicion or request related to ethical dilemmas or problems should be addressed to the editor-in-chief of the journal, using the official e-mail address:

revista.prospectiva@correounivalle.edu.co.

Attention to suspicions of wrong practice

When the journal's Editorial Coordination receives information related to a possible ethical dilemma or suspected malpractice, the case will be analyzed following the COPE recommendations and the corresponding flowcharts to investigate possible malpractice and determine the actions to be taken in case of violation of the journal's ethical framework.

Link to flowcharts: https://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts/complete-set-english Corrections and retractions

The journal Prospectiva may issue corrections or retractions to manuscripts published in its regular or special issues. Corrections will be made when minor but significant errors are identified that may cause confusion about article content, author information, or potential undeclared ethical risks. Such corrections will be applied, especially when errors are unintentional and may mislead readers. In such cases, the journal will publish a correction or erratum along with the original article.

Retractions will be carried out when serious errors are detected in a manuscript or ethical problems (such as data fabrication, manipulation or plagiarism) that compromise the credibility of the work, its results or contributions. Depending on the seriousness of the problem and its possible legal implications, the journal will decide whether to withdraw access to the article or retract it.

Governing bodies

PROSPECTIVA has an executive team, whose members enjoy recognized expertise in the academic and professional field; their names and professional affiliations can be accessed on the journal's website.

The chief editor and the Editorial Board of PROSPECTIVA, along with the Editorial and Scientific Committees, are responsible for defining editorial policies, meeting the standards that allow positioning the parameters ensures the journal's permanent improvement in order to fill the expectations of the academic community.

Chief Editor:

As head of the publishing process, the Chief Editor oversees compliance with the policies and principles of the journal. Specifically, the Chief Editor must ethically respond for:

Decision making. The Chief Editor should guide the decisions on articles, in accordance with verifiable criteria of fairness and justice, taking into account the main objectives of the journal. Submissions will be evaluated objectively on the basis of scientific merit of their contents, without discrimination of race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, ethnicity, nationality or political opinion.
Confidentiality. The Chief Editor is committed to the principle of confidentiality and anonymity in editor-authors and editorreviewers communications. The Chief Editor should not share information related to the article or its process with third parties or colleagues not related to the journal, except when an expert's concept is needed, in which case the specific permission of authors is required. The Chief Editor shall not use the results of scientific research of unpublished articles for his/her own benefit or that of others, unless there is express permission of authors.
Communication.The Chief Editor should inform authors in a timely and adequate manner on the status of their submission within the respective editorial process, and supply information whenever the authors request it. Similarly, he/she should communicate evaluators about the commitments they assume when accepting the evaluation of a document
Compliance. The Chief Editor must oversee compliance with PROSPECTIVA's internal policies and editorial policies, as well as the publication of each issue, either printed or digital, in the right times.

The Chief Editor is also responsible for:

Actively request the opinions of the Editorial Team and Committees, as well as those of authors, readers, and reviewers, on ways to improve the journal.
Generate initiatives to reduce bad academic conduct.
Apoyar iniciativas para educar a los investigadores acerca de la ética de publicación/ cuestiones éticas de la revista.
Support initiatives to educate researchers about the ethics of publication/ethical issues of the journal.
To promote the publication of corrections when he finds mistakes.

The Editorial Team:

The Editorial Team is responsible for handling all the articles submitted to the journal, and should guarantee confidentiality during the peer review process until publication or rejection. Other principles that must be guaranteed include:

Peer-review process and editorial decision. Editorial decisions are conducted through a peer-review process, whose rigorous procedure enables reviewers to use public and transparent evaluation criteria and at the same time allows authors to improve their articles. The review process guarantees that there is a sufficient number of reviewers who are selected among the most qualified people and specialists in the field of the submitted paper, in order to make the editorial decision as expert and objective as possible.
Timing of the publishing process. The Editorial Team is committed to complying with the schedules set for the revision and publication of accepted papers as stated on the guidelines and procedures for submission of manuscripts. Since the journal's editorial standards are published, it is expected for them to be met in their entirety; in addition, corrections, clarifications, and explanations should be published if necessary. When the journal receives complaints of any kind, the editorial team must respond promptly, in accordance with the guidelines established for publication; if the complaint requires so, an appropriate investigation should be conducted in order to find a solution to the problem. If lack of accuracy is found in a published article, it shall be consulted with the Editorial Committee, making the corresponding corrections or clarifications on the journal's website. As soon an issue of the journal comes out, the editorial team is responsible for its dissemination and distribution among collaborators, evaluators, and institutions with which there are existing exchange agreements, as well as among national and international indexes and repositories.

Authors:

Authors must submit their articles through the indicated channels: website, OJS, or via email revista.prospectiva@correounivalle.edu.co. The journal has some rules and procedures for the submission of manuscripts that should be considered prior to the submission of articles.

Although the Chief Editor and the Editorial Team approve articles based on criteria such as quality, relevance, and investigative thoroughness, the authors are responsible for ideas expressed on their articles, as well as for ethical appropriateness.

Originality, plagiarism and exclusivity. Authors must explicitly state that the texts are of their own and that they respect the rights of intellectual property of third parties. Manuscripts must be unpublished, and authors are required to declare that their findings are original and that there is no plagiarism, distortion, or manipulation of them.
Commitment to exclusivity. Articles submitted to PROSPECTIVA should not have been simultaneously submitted to another journal for publication.
Quotations and references. If an article uses material not owned by its authors, it is their responsibility to ensure they have authorizations to use, reproduce, and publish illustrations, graphics, maps, diagrams, photographs, etc. Sources must always be cited and a list of bibliographic references of all the sources should be included.
Authorship. Articles in which more than one person has contributed shall rank authorship based on responsibility and involvement in its preparation. Similarly, inclusion of all the persons who have made significant scientific and intellectual contributions in the development of the research project and the drafting of the article must be ensured.
Responsibility. All persons submitting a manuscript to PROSPECTIVA should accept responsibility for what they have written, which must be backed by an in-depth analysis of the most current and relevant scientific literature, and by its discussion.
Ethics in methodology. The methodology of research projects must be respectful towards the dignity of persons. Among the principles of the American Psychological Association (APA) Code of Conduct for Researchers, we highlight the following: discussing the limits of confidentiality and seeking to preserve it; minimizing intrusion and invasiveness of private life; keeping records, and keeping informed consents to record or film research.
Attention to diversity, gender and inclusion. Submissions must have a respectful approach towards diversity of identities, needs, and capabilities of people, while avoiding any bias or discrimination against the disadvantaged. Likewise, avoid linguistic sexism by using an inclusive language that allows making visible.
Conflict of interest and dissemination. It is necessary to explicitly declare that there are no conflicts of interest concerning the results or proposed interpretations. Similarly, there should be a clear indication of any source of funding by the institution or project "if applicable" within which the research which supports the article has been conducted.
Consistency with the principles of social work. Articles must be consistent with the principles of social work in the field of human rights, human dignity, and social justice, as stated in the code of ethics of the profession by the International Federation of Social Workers FITS (http://ifsw.org/policies/statement-of-ethical-principles)
Errors in published articles. Any relevant error or inaccuracy should be communicated to the editorial team for them to make the necessary corrections in the online publication.

Peer reviewers:

Peer reviewers have a very important role in the editorial process of Revista PROSPECTIVA. Their concepts and evaluations must meet the principles of objectivity, and they should be based on academic merit; also, influence. They may make suggestions to authors, noting any relevant references that have not been included in their article, as well as any other issues related to the structure and argumentative consistency of the text. Preferably, reviewers will be external to the institution, and should have no conflicts of interest with the topics on which they will conceptualize. When in doubt, evaluators shall be replaced.

The journal has devised a form containing questions with criteria carefully defined on the article submitted to evaluation; the evaluator must respond to this questionnaire. In turn, the evaluator is responsible for expressing acceptance, rejection or approval with conditions of the article under evaluation. In any case, it is the Editorial Committee the one that makes the decision based on the requested concepts.

In the evaluation process, reviewers shall ensure the following principles:

Confidentiality. Reviewers should not share with third parties information related to the article or process they are evaluating. Where an external opinion is necessary, they must request authorization from the Chief Editor and explain the reasons for making the request. Similarly, reviewers should not use the contents of articles not published for their own profit or that of others, unless they have permission of authors. The violation of this principle of confidentiality is a bad practice by reviewers.
Contribution to quality. Those committed to evaluating the works submitted to PROSPECTIVA should conduct a critical, constructive, and non-biased evaluation, in order to ensure the scientific and literary quality in their field.
Willingness to evaluate. Upon receipt of a request for evaluation, reviewers should respond within the next 7 days if they are willing to conduct the evaluation. In case of a positive response, they are responsible for critically and cordially responding to requests by the Chief Editor or the authors. It is undesirable for reviewers to have a conflict of interest, but if that is the case, they should provide a written note to the Chief Editor, who decides whether it is convenient or not to accept their participation in the evaluation process.
Time management. While PROSPECTIVA sets a maximum time for the review process, articles should be evaluated in the shortest possible time in order to optimize the publishing process. Similarly, if evaluators feel they are not able to complete their review because the article is beyond their competence, because of any conflict of interest, or because they don't have enough time, they must immediately inform the Chief Editor through the regular communication channels.
Detection of errors and bad editorial practices. Reviewers should pay careful attention to the absence of references by other authors that they consider relevant. Also, If detect possible bad practices by authors, they are obliged to notify the Chief Editor so that he/she takes the appropriate actions in accordance with the ethical principles of the journal.

[Home] [About of a Journal] [Editorial Board] [Subscription]

All the content of this journal is identified under a Creative Commons Licence

Universidad del Valle

Dirección Postal
Universidad del Valle
Facultad de Humanidades. Edificio 386.
Escuela de Trabajo Social y Desarrollo Humano. 4to piso Oficina 4033
Ciudad Universitaria Meléndez
Calle 13 # 100-00
A.A.25360
Phone:(57 2)331 52 29 Ext. 101
Cali, Colombia

revista.prospectiva@correounivalle.edu.co