Editorial Code of Ethics

Scientific integrity and transparency in academic publishing processes are essential for the generation and dissemination of knowledge. The Autonomous University of Sinaloa (UAS), committed to academic excellence and intellectual rigor in all its areas of knowledge, adopts as its general regulatory framework the principles established in its own Institutional Code of Ethics, which urge the university community to conduct itself with honesty, responsibility, and transparency in the exercise of its professional and academic activities.

In accordance with this commitment, this Editorial Code of Ethics (hereinafter, the Code) establishes the principles and procedures that must govern the conduct of all individuals involved in the process of receiving, evaluating, editing, and publishing the works disseminated by this journal. Its international regulatory foundation rests on the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), a global reference body in the field of scientific publishing ethics, whose standards guide responsible editorial practices in academic journals across all disciplines.

The Code is not intended to replace the judgment of the members of the editorial community, but rather to guide their actions toward verifiable standards of integrity, fairness, and rigor. Its adoption is a necessary condition for the journal to maintain the trust of the academic community and contribute to the advancement of knowledge at the highest levels of integrity.

Code Structure

This Code is organized into the following chapters:

I. Scope
II. Purposes
III. Target Audience
IV. Principles of Editorial Ethics
V. Evaluation and Publication Process
VI. Management of Unethical Conduct

VII. Ethical and Responsible Use of Artificial Intelligence

Chapter I

Scope

The provisions of this Code are mandatory for all individuals involved, at any stage, in the processes of receiving, peer reviewing, editing, proofreading, and publishing the academic works disseminated by this journal under the imprint of the Autonomous University of Sinaloa. Its scope includes both internal editorial staff and external contributors, including those who submit manuscripts for consideration.

Chapter II

Purposes

This Code has the following purposes:

To establish the ethical principles that guide the conduct of all individuals involved in the journal's editorial process, regardless of their discipline, subject area, or institutional affiliation.

To promote responsible, equitable, and transparent publishing practices, aligned with COPE's international standards and the Code of Ethics of the Autonomous University of Sinaloa.
To protect the integrity of peer review processes and ensure that editorial decisions are based exclusively on academic criteria.
To prevent and sanction unethical conduct such as plagiarism, fabrication or falsification of data, fictitious authorship, duplicate publication, and undeclared conflicts of interest.

To establish clear mechanisms for handling complaints, corrections, and retractions, in accordance with COPE protocols.

Chapter III

Target Audience

This Code applies to all individuals involved in the journal's editorial process. The main roles are described below:

Author: Any individual who has made a substantial intellectual contribution to the conception, development, analysis, or writing of the work submitted for publication, according to the authorship criteria established by COPE.

Editor-in-Chief: Responsible for directing, supervising, and ensuring the academic and ethical quality of the entire editorial process. Represents the highest authority in publication decisions.

Editorial Board: Responsible for monitoring and developing the peer review stages. They propose topics for special issues, evaluate contributions and guest editors, and provide recommendations.

Guest Editors: Academics who serve as editors for a special issue of the journal, propose a thematic issue aligned with their area of ​​expertise, and promote participation in their academic networks.

Scientific Committee: A collegial body that designs and guides the journal's editorial policy. It is responsible for approving general guidelines, resolving editorial disputes, and supporting the editor-in-chief in situations requiring collective deliberation.

Peer Reviewer: An external specialist who confidentially evaluates the methodological quality, originality, and academic relevance of manuscripts submitted for peer review.

Editorial Technical Team: Personnel who participate in the technical tasks of the editorial process: copyediting, layout, metadata management, design, and OJS support.

Chapter IV:

Principles of Editorial Ethics

Article 1. Responsibility

Editorial responsibility implies assuming the consequences of decisions made during the publication process, ensuring the quality of published material, and acting promptly in the event of any irregularity detected.

Obligations of the Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board:

To make acceptance or rejection decisions based exclusively on the academic relevance, originality, clarity of expression, and pertinence of the work in relation to the journal's scope, without considering criteria unrelated to scientific merit.

Clearly communicate the journal's evaluation criteria and editorial guidelines, making them accessible to authors from the moment of submission.
Be prepared to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions, or apologies when errors or unethical conduct are detected in previously published work, following COPE protocols.
Act promptly in response to any significant inaccuracy, misleading information, or unethical conduct identified in a manuscript in progress or a published article.
Refer cases that require it to the Editorial Committee, in accordance with established institutional procedures.
Author Obligations:

Declare any conflict of interest, whether financial or otherwise, that could influence the results or interpretation of the work. Sources of project funding must be indicated.

Explicitly state the author's role.

Immediately notify the editor-in-chief when a significant error is detected in one's own previously published work, and actively collaborate in its correction or retraction.
Comply with the journal's editorial guidelines regarding format, length, and citation style.

Obligations of peer reviewers:

Notify the editor-in-chief of any conflict of interest regarding the assigned manuscript before beginning the evaluation, and decline the review if the conflict cannot be resolved.
Communicate promptly if you lack sufficient expertise to evaluate the assigned work or if it is not possible to complete the review within the established timeframe.
Inform the editor-in-chief of any indication that, in your judgment, justifies the immediate rejection of the manuscript, including well-founded suspicions of plagiarism, data fabrication, or prior publication.
Evaluate the intellectual content of the manuscript objectively and support each observation with verifiable academic criteria. Article 2. Probity

Probity requires that all persons involved in the editorial process act with integrity, honesty, and impartiality, without pursuing personal gain or causing harm to third parties in the performance of their duties.

Obligations of the Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board:

Reject manuscripts in which there are well-founded indications of unethical conduct. Rejection applies equally to unpublished works and to those previously published when an irregularity is identified. Before making a final decision, the Editor-in-Chief must give the individuals involved an opportunity to respond; if the response is not satisfactory, the Editor-in-Chief will initiate an investigation with the appropriate authority.

Plagiarism in any form—including self-plagiarism, plagiarism of ideas, and plagiarism of text—and any other conduct contrary to scientific integrity will not be tolerated.

Authors' Obligations:

Authors must guarantee that the work submitted for publication is original, the product of the authors' intellectual work, and has not been previously published or is currently under review by another journal or publisher, in any language or format. A work will be considered previously published when: the full text has been disseminated in any print or electronic medium; extensive excerpts from the manuscript are part of previously published works; or the work appears in its entirety in conference proceedings or other publicly accessible publications. Unpublished versions translated into another language will be considered original works.
Authors must correctly cite all sources used, including their own previously published works, respecting the intellectual property rights of others.
Authors may only include as co-authors those who have made substantial contributions to the work, according to the criteria established in the Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT) described in the author guidelines. All co-authors must have approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication.

Submit a written declaration guaranteeing the originality of the work, intellectual property rights over the author's own content, and respect for the rights of third parties regarding materials reproduced with permission.
Obligations of peer reviewers:

Do not use privileged information, unpublished data, or ideas obtained through the peer review process for personal gain, nor share the manuscript's content with third parties without the express authorization of the editor-in-chief.
Conduct the evaluation objectively. All criticism must be directed at the academic content of the work and expressed with well-founded arguments; personal criticism of the author is inappropriate and inadmissible.

Article 3. Transparency

Transparency implies providing adequate publicity for editorial processes, offering authors clear and timely information on the status of their manuscripts, and justifying the decisions made within the framework of the evaluation and publication process.

To ensure transparency, the editorial committee shall:

Publish and keep updated the evaluation criteria, author guidelines, and editorial procedures of the journal.
Inform authors, within a reasonable timeframe, of the stage of the editorial process their manuscript is in, as well as the evaluation result with the corresponding justification.
Respond promptly and with supporting documentation to complaints, inquiries, or appeals submitted by authors, offering a reasoned resolution in all cases.
Notify authors of any changes to the editorial criteria or procedures, as well as the reasons for them.
Include the date in published articles.

The date of receipt, the date of acceptance, and, where applicable, the history of corrections or retractions.

Article 4. Confidentiality

Confidentiality protects the information generated during the editorial process and safeguards the identity of the individuals involved in peer review, guaranteeing the impartiality of the process.

To preserve confidentiality, all individuals involved in the editorial process must:

Treat all content related to manuscripts under review as confidential information, including their existence, content, and the outcome of the review.

Guarantee double-blind anonymity in the peer review process: the authors' identities will not be revealed to the reviewers, nor will the reviewers' identities be communicated to the authors at any stage of the process.
Not disclose information about any received manuscript to individuals outside the editorial process, except for those directly involved in its evaluation or editing. Refrain from using unpublished materials discovered during the review process for personal research or any other benefit without the express written consent of the corresponding author.

Article 5. Equity and Inclusion

Editorial decisions will be made without discrimination based on gender, ethnic or national origin, institutional affiliation, country of origin, original language of writing, ideological orientation, or any other condition unrelated to the academic merit of the work. The journal guarantees that its evaluation and selection procedures are equitable and accessible to authors from diverse backgrounds and institutional contexts.

Chapter V

Evaluation and Publication Process

Article 6. Receipt and Initial Editorial Review

All manuscripts received will undergo a preliminary editorial review by the editor-in-chief, who will determine whether the work meets the formal criteria established in the journal's guidelines and whether its content is relevant to its thematic scope. This review takes approximately one week. Manuscripts that do not pass this stage will be returned to their authors with an explanation of the reasons for rejection.

Article 7. Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial review will undergo a double-blind peer review process. Each manuscript will be assigned to two reviewers with proven expertise in the subject area of ​​the work. The review period is approximately six to eight weeks, subject to adjustment depending on the length and complexity of the manuscript. The possible results of the review are: accepted without modifications, accepted with minor modifications, accepted with major modifications, and rejected. In the event of conflicting opinions between the two reviewers, the editor-in-chief may request a third opinion.

Article 8. Corrections by Authors

When the review results in acceptance with minor or major modifications, the reviewers' observations and suggestions will be sent to the authors, who will have fifteen calendar days to make minor corrections and thirty days to make major corrections. After this period, the revised version of the manuscript must be submitted. Along with the revised version, authors must include a cover letter detailing the changes made or, if applicable, providing a reasoned justification for not incorporating any of the observations.

Article 9. Final Decision and Publication

The final acceptance of a manuscript rests with the editor-in-chief, who will have the support of the Editorial Committee in cases where necessary. Once accepted, the article will be included in the issue determined by the editorial team according to the journal's publication schedule.

Article 10. Copyediting and Final Editing

Before publication, all accepted articles will undergo a copyediting and technical editing process. This work is carried out by the journal's editorial team. The editing process for each issue varies in duration, depending on the length and number of articles included.

Chapter VI

Management of Unethical Conduct

Article 11. Detection and Investigation

When potential unethical conduct is detected, either during the peer review process or after publication of a work, the editor-in-chief will initiate an internal investigation in accordance with COPE protocols. This process will guarantee the right of the individuals involved to present their version of events before any decision is made.

Article 12. Applicable Measures

Measures for duly substantiated unethical conduct may include, but are not limited to:

a) Immediate rejection of the manuscript in question

a) Retraction of the published article through a duly substantiated public statement.

b) Formal notification to the institution where the person involved is affiliated.

c) Temporary or permanent disqualification from publishing in the journal.

d) Communication of the case to other journals in the institutional repository of Scientific Journals of the Autonomous University of Sinaloa.

The seriousness of the conduct and the circumstances of the case will determine which of these measures are applied. In all cases, the Editorial Committee's decision will be communicated in writing to the individuals involved.

Article 13. Corrections and Retractions

When a significant error is detected in a published article, the journal will publish a correction or errata as soon as possible. If the existence of fabricated data, falsified results, plagiarism, or any other serious violation of scientific integrity is proven, the article will be formally retracted, in accordance with COPE guidelines. The retracted version will remain accessible in the repository, with a clear indication of its status.

Chapter VII

Ethical and Responsible Use of Artificial Intelligence

This journal recognizes the Chapultepec Principles: Declaration of Ethics and Best Practices for the Use and Development of Artificial Intelligence as its guiding normative framework. The provisions of this chapter apply to authors, peer reviewers, members of the editorial team, and members of the journal's governing bodies.

Article 14. Human Responsibility in the Use of AI

The use of artificial intelligence tools at any stage of the research, writing, review, or editorial management process does not exempt the individuals involved from their intellectual, academic, and ethical responsibility for the work produced or the decisions made. AI does not replace intellectual authorship, academic judgment, peer review, or editorial decision-making.

Authors are responsible for the final content of their manuscripts in their entirety, including elements generated, assisted, or reviewed with the support of AI tools: ideas, arguments, data, citations, references, images, translations, analyses, and conclusions. The editorial team and peer reviewers retain full responsibility for their opinions, recommendations, and decisions. No editorial decision may be left exclusively to automated systems.

Article 15. Declaration of Use of Artificial Intelligence

When artificial intelligence has been used significantly in the preparation of a manuscript, the authors must clearly declare this within the text, in the space designated by the journal: methodological note, acknowledgments section, final declaration, or other specific section.

The declaration will indicate, as appropriate, the type of tool used, its purpose, and the scope of its involvement. Declarable uses include, but are not limited to: copyediting, translation, organization of ideas, data analysis, image generation, information processing, preliminary literature searches, and writing assistance.
The undeclared use of AI, when it has substantially influenced the production of the manuscript, will be considered a lack of editorial transparency and may result in the measures provided for in Article 12 of this Code.

Article 16. Academic Integrity and Limits on the Use of AI

The use of artificial intelligence to fabricate, falsify, or manipulate data, citations, results, images, bibliographic sources, opinions, identities, authorship, or research evidence is prohibited.

The use of AI to generate misleading content, disinformation, plagiarism, disguised paraphrasing of others' work, impersonation of authorship, or any practice contrary to academic and scientific integrity is also prohibited.

AI tools may be used to support, but not as a substitute for, critical thinking, disciplinary interpretation, academic argumentation, rigorous document review, or the ethical responsibility of those involved in the publication process.

Article 17. Explainability and Verifiability

All content produced with the support of artificial intelligence must be reviewable, explainable, and verifiable by the individuals responsible for the manuscript or the editorial process.

When AI is used for data analysis, information classification, results generation, image creation, or methodological assistance, the authors shall provide sufficient information for the procedure to be understood and academically evaluated. If an AI-assisted result or procedure cannot be reasonably explained, it shall not be presented as conclusive academic evidence.

Article 18. Use of AI in Peer Review and Editorial Management

Reviewers and editors shall maintain strict confidentiality regarding received manuscripts.

Authors will not upload, copy, or process unpublished manuscripts, sensitive data, confidential information, or materials subject to evaluation in external AI tools unless expressly authorized by the journal and subject to verifiable data protection and confidentiality conditions.

The use of AI for editorial support will be limited to auxiliary tasks: formatting review, preliminary detection of inconsistencies, linguistic support, metadata management, or technical text improvement, always under human supervision. AI may not replace the academic evaluation of reviewers or the editorial decision of the journal's editorial team.

Article 19. Data Protection and Privacy

Authors, reviewers, and the editorial team will protect personal, sensitive, confidential, or institutional information contained in manuscripts, databases, editorial records, opinions, or internal communications of the journal.

Personal data, medical records, private information, institutional files, unpublished research data, or confidential information will not be introduced into AI tools without express authorization, adequate anonymization, and compliance with applicable personal data protection regulations.

Article 20. Non-discrimination, diversity, and inclusion in the use of AI

The use of artificial intelligence in research and publishing processes must avoid reproducing biases, exclusions, stereotypes, or forms of discrimination based on gender, ethnicity, social status, disability, age, language, culture, territory, sexual orientation, academic discipline, or any other condition.

The journal recognizes the importance of cultural and linguistic diversity in knowledge production. The use of AI will be carried out with attention to local, regional, and national contexts, avoiding the homogenization of forms of expression, analysis, or interpretation specific to each academic community.

Article 21. AI Policy Update

Given the rapid pace of evolution of artificial intelligence technologies, the provisions of this chapter may be reviewed and updated independently of the Code's general review cycle, when required by relevant changes in international best editorial practices, applicable regulatory frameworks, or scientific journal indexing criteria.

Transitional Provisions

Sole Provision. This Editorial Code of Ethics will enter into force upon its publication in the International Journal of Social Sciences of the Mexican Pacific of the Autonomous University of Sinaloa and will be mandatory for all editorial processes of the journal from that date forward. Its periodic review is the responsibility of the Editorial Committee, with a minimum frequency of every three years, or when required by changes in international standards of ethics in scientific publishing.