Submissions

Author Guidelines

Psicología desde el Caribe journal does not apply Article Processing Charges (APC) therefore the authors don't pay any fee for the reception, reviewing and publishing of any type of article.

Editorial Guidelines

1. Documents received, which may be published in Psicologia desde el Caribe , must fit into one of two types of scientific papers:
a. Research article.
b. Review article, with a minimum of fifty (50) references.

2. Articles must be uploaded to the OJS system of Universidad del Norte. This requires the lead author to register and follow the steps presented by the OJS system. The registration link is: http://rcientificas.uninorte.edu.co/index.php/psicologia/user/register. Any additional information can be consulted with the journal's editor through the following email address: psicaribe@uninorte.edu.co

3. Initially, the article will go through a review of its length, relevance, format and overall quality to decide if it will be sent to an external peer assessment or whether it will be rejected immediately. If it's submitted for peer review, external referees will evaluate the document which will be sent without author names or institutional affiliations. The articles will be evaluated for their consistency, relevance, scientific rigor, and clarity. Then, the external evaluators will issue a review (favorable or unfavorable) of the article following an evaluation format provided by the magazine. Additionally, the evaluators will make suggestions to the authors if they think it's necessary. The Editorial Committee will go through the documents again, consider the reviews made by the evaluators, and send the result to the authors of the article. If modifications to the article are required, the author will be asked to make each one of them. Items that have successfully completed this process will be accepted and sent to Ediciones Uninorte for final layout and publication.

4. The extension of scientific articles must be of twenty (20) pages maximum, excluding references and abstract. The body of the document must be double space, size font 12.

5. The style used for scientific articles should be APA , English Sixth Edition.

6. If the article contains tables, charts or graphs, the original documents of the material must be attached, following the uploading instructions from the OJS system.

7. The submission must include information about each one of the authors including: highest academic degree, current institutional affiliation and only one correspondence address for all of the authors, which will be included in the final document once it is going to be published.

8. The abstract of the article should be included in both English and Spanish. The abstract must contain: objectives, method, and results in maximum 200 words.

9. The acceptance or rejection of the articles will be notified through the main correspondence author.

10. The opinions expressed in the articles of this journal are those of the author.

11. Authors must fill out and submit the article remission form, including the names of ALL authors.

12. Submissions must include names of ALL authors in the system (Add Authors, you can find the button right below the name of the person who makes the submission). Likewise, all email addresses and institution information must be included. When an author is not included from the beginning, we understad that the authorship belongs only to the people registered in the system. Therefore, you should make sure no author is left unincluded.

13. Authors must upload their paper ensuring blind review: Do not include names or institutions, make sure the document information does not contain names either. Avoid using anonymous citations regarding your own publications, because you will have to include the reference anyways, and it will take the reviewer to your names easily by just putting the name of the paper or DOI in google.

14. The author, who submits the paper, implicitly certifies that all authors worked on the article and agreed that their name appears as co-author.

Ethical Standards

Currently, Universidad del Norte publishes 10 journals. Publication of an article in an academic peer-reviewed journal serves several functions, one of which is to validate and preserve the "minutes" of research. It is therefore of great importance that these "minutes" are accurate and trustworthy. The act of publishing involves many parties, each of which plays an important role in achieving these goals. It therefore follows that the author, the journal editor, the peer-reviewer, and the publisher have responsibilities to meet expected ethical standards at all stages in their involvement from submission to publication of an article.
Universidad del Norte is committed to meeting and upholding standards of ethical behavior at all stages of the publication process. We follow closely the industry associations, such as the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICJME) and World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), that set standards and provide guidelines for best practices in order to meet these requirements.
Below is a summary of our key expectations of editors, peer-reviewers and authors, which adhere to the publication ethics and malpractice policies outlined by COPE. More extensive resources are available from COPE and (WAME) .

1. ETHICAL EXPECTATIONS

Editors' responsibilities
· To act in a balanced, objective and fair way while carrying out their expected duties, without discrimination on grounds of gender, sexual orientation, religious or political beliefs, ethnic or geographical origin of the authors.
· To handle submissions for sponsored supplements or special issues in the same way as other submissions, so that articles are considered and accepted solely on their academic merit and without commercial influence.
· To adopt and follow reasonable procedures in the event of complaints of an ethical or conflict nature. To give authors a reasonable opportunity to respond to any complaints. All complaints should be investigated no matter when the original publication was approved. Documentation associated with any such complaints should be retained.

Reviewers' responsibilities
· To contribute to the decision-making process, and to assist in improving the quality of the published paper by reviewing the manuscript objectively, in a timely manner
· To maintain the confidentiality of any information supplied by the editor or author. To not retain or copy the manuscript.
· To alert the editor to any published or submitted content that is substantially similar to that under review.
· To be aware of any potential conflicts of interest (financial, institutional, collaborative or other relationships between the reviewer and author) and to alert the editor to these, if necessary withdrawing their services for that manuscript.

Authors' responsibilities
· To maintain accurate records of data associated with their submitted manuscript, and to supply or provide access to these data, on reasonable request. Where appropriate and where allowed by employer, funding body and others who might have an interest, to deposit data in a suitable repository or storage location, for sharing and further use by others.
· To confirm that the manuscript as submitted is not under consideration or accepted for publication elsewhere. Where portions of the content overlap with published or submitted content, to acknowledge and cite those sources. Additionally, to provide the editor with a copy of any submitted manuscript that might contain overlapping or closely related content.
· To confirm that all the work in the submitted manuscript is original and to acknowledge and cite content reproduced from other sources. To obtain permission to reproduce any content from other sources.
· Authors must guarantee that any studies involving human or animal subjects conform to national, local and institutional laws and requirements (e.g. WMA Declaration of Helsinki, NIH Policy on Use of laboratory Animals, EU Directive on Use of Animals) and confirm that approval has been sought and obtained where appropriate. Authors should obtain express permission from human subjects and respect their privacy.
· To declare any potential conflicts of interest (e.g. where the author has a competing interest (real or apparent) that could be considered or viewed as exerting an undue influence on his or her duties at any stage during the publication process).
· To notify promptly the journal editor or publisher if a significant error in their publication is identified. To cooperate with the editor and publisher to publish an erratum, addendum, corrigendum notice, or to retract the paper, where this is deemed necessary.

Publisher responsibilities
· Universidad del Norte shall ensure that good practice is maintained to the standards outlined above.

2. PROCEDURES FOR DEALING WITH UNETHICAL BEHAVIOUR

Identification of unethical behaviour
· Misconduct and unethical behaviour may be identified and brought to the attention of the editor and publisher at any time, by anyone.
· Whoever informs the editor or publisher of such conduct should provide sufficient information and evidence in order for an investigation to be initiated. All allegations should be taken seriously and treated in the same way, until a successful decision or conclusion is reached.

Investigation
· An initial decision should be taken by the editor, who should consult with or seek advice from the publisher, if appropriate.
· Evidence should be gathered, while avoiding spreading any allegations beyond those who need to know.

Minor breaches
· Minor misconduct might be dealt with without the need to consult more widely. In any event, the author should be given the opportunity to respond to any allegations.

Serious breaches
· Serious misconduct might require that the employers of the accused be notified. The editor, in consultation with the publisher, should make the decision whether or not to involve the employers, either by examining the available evidence themselves or by further consultation with a limited number of experts.

Outcomes (in increasing order of severity; may be applied separately or in conjunction)
· Informing or educating the author or reviewer where there appears to be a misunderstanding or misapplication of acceptable standards.
· A more strongly worded letter to the author or reviewer covering the misconduct and as a warning to future behaviour.
· Publication of a formal notice detailing the misconduct.
· Publication of an editorial detailing the misconduct.
· A formal letter to the head of the author's or reviewer's department or funding agency.
· Formal retraction or withdrawal of a publication from the journal, in conjunction with informing the head of the author or reviewer's department, Abstracting & Indexing services and the readership of the publication.
· Imposition of a formal embargo on contributions from an individual for a defined period.
· Reporting the case and outcome to a professional organisation or higher authority for further investigation and action.

SOURCE

http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/New_Code.pdf

http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines