Policies

Author Policies

 

Submission of manuscripts to Revista Irriga implies full acceptance of the editorial policies set out below. These guidelines ensure transparency, accountability, and integrity in scientific publishing.

 

  1. Authorship and Contribution

 

Authorship should be attributed only to those who contributed significantly to the conception, execution, analysis, or writing of the article. All listed authors must:

  • Have actively participated in the work development process;
  • Be aware of submission;
  • Approve the final version of the manuscript.

 

  1. Order of Authorship

 

The order of authors must be agreed upon by all involved parties prior to submission, reflecting the relative importance of each contribution. The journal does not intervene in authorship disputes.

 

  1. Legal Responsibility

 

All authors share responsibility for the content of their articles. The corresponding author assumes responsibility for all communications with the journal and must ensure:

  • The veracity of the information;
  • Compliance with ethical standards;
  • Authorization from responsible institutions or bodies, where applicable.

 

  1. Originality and Exclusivity

 

Irriga Journal publishes only original and unpublished works. Manuscripts cannot be under review in another journal or have been previously published, in whole or in part. Detection of plagiarism or self-plagiarism will result in immediate rejection and, in serious cases, notification to the institutions involved.

 

  1. Adherence to the Journal's Standards

 

Manuscripts must comply with Irriga Journal's author guidelines .

Non-standard manuscripts will be returned for adjustments before evaluation.

 

  1. Acknowledgments

 

Contributions that do not justify authorship (technical, financial or institutional support) must be mentioned in the acknowledgments section, with due permission from those mentioned.

 

 

 

  1. Evaluators' Suggestions

 

Authors are invited to suggest up to three potential reviewers who have no conflict of interest with the authors or their institutions. The final selection of reviewers is the sole responsibility of the editorial board.

 

  1. Author Identifiers

 

All authors must provide their ORCID identifier upon submission. This identifier ensures transparency in authorship attribution and facilitates publication tracking.

 

  1. Retraction and Corrections

 

Irriga Journal follows best practices for correcting scientific records. If significant errors are identified after publication, the following may be published:

  • Corrections (errata) : for specific adjustments;
  • Retractions : when there are serious failures, misconduct or compromised conclusions.

Retraction may be requested by the authors themselves or by the editorial team.

 

 

 

Editorial Policy for Publishers

 

Editorial practice at Revista Irriga must be based on principles of scientific integrity, transparency, fairness, and ethical responsibility. The following guidelines aim to guide editors in conducting the editorial process, ensuring the quality and credibility of the publication.

 

1. Freedom of Expression

 

Irriga Journal guarantees the academic freedom of its authors and editors. Published content must be evaluated exclusively based on scientific merit, intellectual independence, and methodological rigor, without political, ideological, institutional, or commercial interference.

 

2. Confidentiality and Anonymity

 

All submitted manuscripts are treated confidentially throughout the editorial process. Editors must:

  • Maintain confidentiality regarding the content of manuscripts;
  • double-blind peer review system peer review);
  • Protect the identity of reviewers and authors, unless both explicitly authorize their identification.

 

3. Conflict of Interest Management

 

Editors should refrain from reviewing manuscripts with personal, professional, or financial conflicts of interest. In such cases, the manuscript will be forwarded to another editor.

Editors and reviewers must declare conflicts, if any, and the journal maintains records of this information to ensure the integrity of the process.

 

4. Interaction Record

 

All editorial interactions, opinions and decisions must be recorded in the journal's management system (OJS or other), in a transparent and auditable manner, ensuring traceability and accountability.

 

5. Guidelines on Authorship Disputes

 

In case of authorship disputes or inclusion/exclusion of authors after submission:

  • The publisher should request a formal statement from all involved;
  • The decision will be based on the journal's authorship policy and COPE guidelines;
  • If necessary, the process may be suspended until the dispute is resolved.

 

6. Authors' Rights

 

Authors retain the moral and property rights to their works as defined in the Creative Commons license (CC-BY or equivalent). Revista Irriga respects the intellectual integrity of authors and guarantees the right to reply, correct, or retract when necessary.

 

7. Self-archiving

 

Irriga Journal allows and encourages the self-archiving of pre- and post-print versions of articles in institutional or thematic repositories, respecting the terms of the license adopted by the journal. This policy strengthens open science and free access to knowledge.

 

8. Plagiarism Detection and Similarity Checking

 

All submitted manuscripts are analyzed using similarity checking tools ( Turnitin ). Manuscripts with signs of plagiarism, self-plagiarism, or unauthorized use of content will be rejected or returned for clarification. Serious cases will be reported to the authors' institutions.

 

9. Indexing Sources

 

Editors must continually monitor the presence of Revista Irriga in national and international indexing databases, ensuring its reputation, visibility and compliance with quality criteria.

 

10. Controlled Vocabulary

 

Revista Irriga adopts controlled and standardized vocabularies for indexing keywords and metadata, aiming to facilitate the retrieval and interoperability of information.

 

11. Digital Preservation Policy

 

Irriga Journal adopts long-term digital preservation strategies, such as the use of LOCKSS and CLOCKSS systems, backups in institutional repositories, and external archives. All published content remains available with a persistent DOI.

 

12. Editorial Impartiality

 

The editorial process must be conducted with absolute impartiality, based on the technical criteria defined by the journal. No discrimination based on authors' nationality, race, gender, institutional affiliation, religion, sexual orientation, or political beliefs will be tolerated.

 

13. Retraction Management

 

When a serious error, plagiarism, fraud or ethical misconduct is identified:

  • The editorial team will review the case based on COPE guidelines;
  • Authors will be offered the opportunity to respond;
  • If confirmed, the journal will publish a retraction, correction or expression of concern, linked to the original article.

 

 

Reviewer Policy – Irriga Journal

 

Committed to academic and scientific integrity, Irriga Journal establishes the following guidelines for reviewers involved in the peer review process. These policies aim to ensure quality, impartiality, and accountability in the editorial process.

By accepting the review invitation, the reviewer declares that they are aware of and agree with this policy. Violation of any of the guidelines established herein may result in removal from the Irriga journal's reviewer registry and, when necessary, communication with the reviewer's home institution.

 

  1. Commitment and Expertise

 

Reviewers should only accept reviews for which they possess adequate technical and scientific expertise. By accepting the invitation, they commit to a thorough, well-founded, and responsible review, contributing to the journal's scientific quality.

 

  1. Confidentiality and Anonymity

 

All content of reviewed manuscripts is confidential and must be treated as such. Sharing, disclosure, or use of information contained in the manuscript for any purpose is prohibited. Irriga's review process is double-blind, meaning the identities of authors and reviewers must remain confidential during and after the review process.

 

  1. Constructive and Objective Assessment

 

Reviews must be written clearly, objectively, and impartially, offering constructive criticism that contributes to the improvement of the manuscript. Offensive, inaccurate, or personal comments will not be tolerated.

 

  1. Respect and Dignity

 

Reviewers are expected to maintain an ethical, respectful, and professional approach in all communications with the editorial team and, indirectly, with authors. Comments should maintain an academic tone, even in cases of harsh criticism.

 

  1. Conflict of Interest

 

Reviewers should decline to evaluate manuscripts in which there is a real or potential conflict of interest, whether personal, financial, institutional, or academic competition. Transparency is essential to maintaining the integrity of the review process.

 

  1. Ethical Violations

 

If the reviewer identifies possible unethical practices, such as plagiarism, data manipulation, self-plagiarism or redundant publication, he/she must immediately notify the journal's editorial board, presenting the elements that support his/her suspicion.

 

  1. Compliance with Deadlines

 

The reviewer must adhere to the established deadlines for review. If the reviewer cannot meet the agreed deadline, promptly notify the editorial team so that further action can be taken.

 

  1. Confidentiality in Assessments

 

Even after the review is completed, reviewers must maintain confidentiality regarding the content of the manuscript and may not use or discuss its information with third parties, unless expressly authorized by the editorial board.

 

  1. Use of Artificial Intelligence

 

The use of artificial intelligence tools to assist in reviewing must be reported to the editorial team. Such tools should not replace the reviewer's critical judgment and cannot be used to insert sensitive manuscript content into public platforms or without confidentiality guarantees.

 

  1. Recommendation for Retraction and Corrections

 

When appropriate, the reviewer may suggest to the editorial board that they evaluate the need for corrections or retraction of previously published articles if they identify serious errors, relevant omissions, or scientific misconduct that compromise the results or integrity of the publication.

 

11. Availability for Review

Invited reviewers must respond to the review request within 5 business days, accepting or declining the assignment.

By accepting the review, the reviewer agrees to submit the review within the stipulated deadline, generally 15 calendar days, unless otherwise specified by the editorial team.