Ethical integrity

1. Editorial Misconduct

ANTEC maintains a policy for the prevention, detection, and handling of misconduct in scientific research and publication. This policy covers, among other practices, plagiarism, self-plagiarism, data fabrication or manipulation, improper attribution of authorship, omission of significant contributions, and failure to disclose conflicts of interest.

The journal will examine potential cases of misconduct objectively, impartially, and confidentially, taking into account the nature and severity of the alleged conduct, the available evidence, and the stage of the editorial process. The detection of indications of misconduct does not mean that the violation has been proven. Accordingly, where appropriate, individuals will be given an opportunity to provide explanations and evidence before a decision is made.

When reasonable grounds exist to suspect potential misconduct or an ethical violation, the procedure established in Article 22 of these guidelines will be followed. The measures adopted will depend on the nature and severity of the conduct, the available information, and the stage of the editorial process, in accordance with the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

The following sections set out the relevant provisions.

1.1. Plagiarism

Plagiarism is defined as the presentation of ideas, texts, data, images, musical scores, or other materials belonging to others without proper acknowledgment of their sources. ANTEC maintains a strict policy against plagiarism, which applies from the initial stage of the evaluation process, known as the pre-review or relevance assessment stage. At this stage, the Editorial Committee will use text-similarity detection tools, such as Turnitin, to identify matches that require further examination.

The similarity percentage obtained will not, in itself, constitute sufficient evidence of plagiarism or automatically determine the rejection of a manuscript. The Editorial Committee will examine the nature and extent of the matches, the presence of appropriate citations and references, and the context in which they appear.

The use of previously published material authored by the submitting author will be permitted only when it is properly identified and cited, as specified in Article 20.2.

If an ethical violation is established, the corresponding measures will be applied in accordance with the procedure set out in Article 22 and the severity of the conduct.

1.2. Self-Plagiarism and Improper Reuse

ANTEC considers the reuse of previously published work by the same author without proper identification, citation, or justification to be misconduct when such reuse creates a misleading impression of originality or a new contribution. This practice may take the following forms:

Duplicate or redundant publication: This occurs when the same article or study is published in two different journals or other publication venues without informing the relevant editors or properly acknowledging the previous publication. It may involve translating the text into another language or changing the title or other formal elements without making a substantial new contribution.
Fragmented publication (salami slicing): This occurs when a research project is divided into several articles for the purpose of increasing the number of publications without sufficient academic justification. This practice arises when the resulting articles do not constitute independent and substantial contributions but instead artificially fragment the findings of a single study.
Augmented publication or data recycling: This involves reusing previously published work or a dataset, adding only a limited amount of new information, data, or conclusions, and presenting it as entirely new research without properly identifying or citing the earlier work. The reuse of data or results must be justified and explained, and the new manuscript must make a clearly identifiable original contribution.
Text recycling: This involves reusing substantial portions of previously published texts by the same author, such as paragraphs, sections, or pages, without properly identifying or citing the original source. This practice may occur, for example, in the introduction or methodology sections. It must be assessed in light of the extent of the textual overlap, the function of the reused material in the manuscript, and the applicable citation standards.

Authors must inform the Editorial Committee of previous publications, related versions, derivative works, and their own materials used in preparing the manuscript so that the relationship between the publications and the originality of the submitted contribution can be assessed. Properly identified and justified reuse does not, in itself, constitute an ethical violation. Its assessment will depend on the context, the extent of the reused material, the transparency with which it is presented, and the manuscript’s original contribution. When reasonable grounds exist to suspect a potential violation, the procedure established in Article 22 of these guidelines will be followed.

1.3. Data Fabrication, Falsification, or Manipulation

ANTEC does not accept the fabrication, falsification, manipulation, or misleading omission of data, sources, evidence, findings, images, records, musical scores, or other materials used to support research.

Fabrication is defined as the invention of data or results that were not obtained through the procedures described in the manuscript. Falsification or improper manipulation refers to the alteration, selection, modification, or omission of data or evidence in a manner that distorts the findings or conclusions of the work.

Authors are responsible for the integrity and accuracy of the materials submitted and must provide, where appropriate and reasonably possible, information or documentation to clarify questions concerning the research. The journal may request clarifications or additional evidence when there are grounds to do so.

Identified cases will be examined in accordance with the procedure set out in Article 22. Where appropriate, the journal may notify the authors’ affiliated institution, the funding body, or another competent authority.

1.4. Improper Attribution or Omission of Authorship

Authorship must accurately reflect the substantial contributions made to the work. It is not permitted to include as an author someone who has not contributed sufficiently, to omit a person who meets the authorship criteria, or to claim contributions that were not made.

All individuals listed as authors must have made substantial contributions to the work, participated in drafting or critically revising the manuscript, approved the version submitted for publication, and accepted the corresponding responsibility for its content, in accordance with the CRediT contributor roles. Contributions that do not meet the authorship criteria may be acknowledged in the acknowledgments section, with the consent of the individuals concerned where appropriate.

The person submitting the manuscript is responsible for confirming that all authors are aware of and have authorized its submission to ANTEC, that the order of authorship has been agreed upon by all authors, and that the information provided is accurate.

Any changes to authorship during the editorial process, including changes to author order or the addition or removal of an author, must be justified and receive the explicit consent of all authors involved. Authorship disputes will be examined in accordance with the procedure set out in Article 22 and, where appropriate, COPE guidelines.

1.5. Failure to Disclose Conflicts of Interest

Authors, reviewers, and members of the Editorial Committee must disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest that could influence, or reasonably call into question, the impartiality of the research, its evaluation, or the editorial decision. Such conflicts may be financial, professional, institutional, personal, academic, or of another nature.

Authors must disclose conflicts of interest related to the research and preparation of the manuscript or explicitly declare that no such conflicts exist.

Reviewers must disclose any circumstances that could compromise their independence and, where appropriate, refrain from reviewing the manuscript. Members of the Editorial Committee must disclose any conflicts that could affect their involvement in the handling or decision-making process for a submission.

When an editor or member of the Editorial Committee has a conflict of interest related to a manuscript, they must refrain from participating in its review and decision-making. The submission will be assigned to another editor or Committee member who is not involved in the matter and who will be responsible for managing the process independently and impartially.

The existence of a conflict of interest does not automatically entail rejection of the manuscript. The Editorial Committee will assess the circumstances and take the necessary measures to protect the transparency and objectivity of the process. Where appropriate, the conflict and the measures adopted will be recorded in the editorial file.

2. Ethical Responsibilities of Participants

All individuals involved in the publication of each issue of ANTEC must comply with the ethical standards and conduct requirements set out below.

2.1. Editorial Committee

The Editorial Committee has the following responsibilities:

Ensure that all editorial processes are conducted fairly, honestly, impartially, transparently, systematically, and in a timely manner.
Evaluate and select manuscripts based on their quality, thematic relevance, originality, rigor, and compliance with editorial policies, without discrimination on the basis of personal characteristics such as race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, or any other personal characteristic of the authors.
Conduct a preliminary editorial review to verify the manuscript’s relevance, compliance with submission requirements, and the presence of indications that may warrant further assessment.
Appoint at least three external and independent reviewers to evaluate research articles subject to peer review. Reviewers will be selected based on their academic qualifications, experience in the relevant field of knowledge, and absence of relationships that could compromise the objectivity and impartiality of the peer-review process.
Inform authors in a timely manner of the outcomes of the evaluation of their submissions and the status of their manuscripts during the editing and production stages.
Protect the confidentiality of documents and communications submitted by authors and other journal contributors. Unpublished material must not be used for personal purposes without the express consent of the relevant authors or contributors.
Manage conflicts of interest appropriately and refrain from participating in decisions when circumstances could compromise impartiality.
Examine complaints or indications of potential ethical violations in accordance with the procedure established in Article 22, ensuring that the response is objective, documented, and proportionate to the circumstances.
Take appropriate editorial action when ethical or editorial violations are confirmed and report cases to the competent authorities when necessary.

2.2. Authors

Authors have the following responsibilities:

Ensure that the submitted manuscript is original and unpublished, that all sources used are properly cited and referenced, and that it does not involve plagiarism, self-plagiarism, duplicate publication, or other practices contrary to scientific integrity.
Explicitly disclose, at the beginning of the article and in the Open Science Form, any previous publications, related versions, and works from which the manuscript is derived, including preprints and working papers, in accordance with the journal’s policies. Content previously published by the author will be accepted only when properly cited and referenced. The prior posting of a version on a preprint server will not, in itself, be considered duplicate publication. Authors must disclose this circumstance and comply with ANTEC’s preprint policy.
Include any images considered necessary for the development of the article, provided they are relevant and their authorship is specified or, where they belong to others, the corresponding source is cited.
Ensure that authorship accurately reflects the contributions actually made and that all authors have authorized the submission of the manuscript and approved the version submitted.
Disclose funding sources, support received, and conflicts of interest related to the work, or explicitly state when none exist.
Obtain the necessary permissions to reproduce images, musical scores, tables, recordings, or other materials protected by third-party rights, and identify and cite their sources.
Comply with the journal’s policies on the use of artificial intelligence in manuscript preparation and disclose such use where required.
Review editorial and reviewer comments, respond to them clearly and respectfully, and submit revisions within the deadlines communicated by the journal, or request a justified extension.
Review revised versions during editing and production, promptly report any errors identified, and approve the final version before publication.
Accept responsibility for the content of the manuscript, both in the submitted and published versions, and for the accuracy of the information provided throughout the editorial process. The content is presumed to have been prepared in good faith and without the intention of improperly harming or benefiting third parties, unless proven otherwise.

2.3. Peer Reviewers

Peer reviewers have the following responsibilities:

Treat all materials received as confidential. They must not discuss, comment on, or share information contained in a manuscript with third parties, nor contact the authors without the express authorization of the Editorial Committee.
Not use ideas, arguments, or information contained in the material under review for their own benefit or that of third parties before its publication, unless expressly authorized by the authors.
Conduct an objective, well-supported, respectful, and constructive evaluation focused on the quality, relevance, originality, rigor, and clarity of the work, without personal bias or prejudice.
Disclose any conflict of interest that could affect their independence and inform the Editorial Committee if they believe they lack the expertise required to evaluate the manuscript.
Inform the Editorial Committee of any indications of plagiarism, duplicate publication, data manipulation, or other irregularities identified during the review, providing information that will allow the matter to be examined.
Meet the deadlines established by the Editorial Committee when accepting a manuscript for review. In exceptional circumstances, reviewers may request an extension, subject to assessment and approval by the Committee.

3. Procedure for Handling Ethical Issues

3.1. Receipt of Complaints and Identification of Potential Violations

Suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication or manipulation, improper authorship, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or other potential ethical violations may be reported to the ANTEC Editorial Committee through the journal’s official contact channels or the Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform. Such issues may also be identified during editorial evaluation, peer review, or after an article has been published.

Reports should, where possible, provide sufficient information to identify the manuscript or article and describe the alleged conduct, together with any available evidence. Anonymous reports may be examined when they provide verifiable information that warrants further review.

3.2. Preliminary Assessment and Investigation

The Editorial Committee will conduct a preliminary assessment of the information received, as appropriate, to determine whether there are indications that warrant further examination. Where necessary, it may request additional information and consult relevant documentation.

If the indications warrant further action, the author or individuals involved will be informed of the nature of the concerns and given an opportunity to provide explanations or evidence within the deadline specified in the notification.

Where the nature of the case requires it, ANTEC may request information from the affiliated institution of the individuals involved, the funding body, or other competent authorities. The journal will not replace the investigative or disciplinary functions that fall within the remit of those institutions.

3.3. Impartiality and Confidentiality

Cases will be examined objectively, impartially, and confidentially. Information will be shared only with those who need to participate in the assessment and resolution of the case, subject to applicable legal obligations.

No person who is involved in the alleged conduct or has a conflict of interest may lead the investigation or participate in the corresponding editorial decision. In such circumstances, responsibility for handling the case will be assigned to an independent member of the Editorial Committee or another competent editorial body.

The receipt of a complaint does not mean that a violation has been established. The journal will avoid reaching conclusions before examining the evidence and relevant responses.

3.4. Decision and Editorial Measures

After examining the available information and considering the responses of the individuals involved, the Editorial Committee will determine the appropriate measures in accordance with the nature of the conduct and the stage of the editorial process.

Measures may include:

Requesting clarifications, documentation, or corrections from the author.
Rejecting a manuscript when it is established that it does not comply with the journal’s ethical or editorial standards.
Temporarily suspending the editorial process while relevant matters are clarified, where necessary.
Publishing a correction, erratum, clarification, or expression of concern, as appropriate.
Retracting a published article when sufficient grounds exist to do so.
Reporting the case to institutions or other competent authorities when justified by the nature or severity of the conduct.

The decision and its grounds will be communicated to the individuals directly involved through an official channel. When measures are taken concerning a published article, the journal will inform readers transparently and follow the relevant editorial procedures to ensure that the matter is properly documented.

Ultimately, ANTEC will make an editorial decision regarding the manuscript, while the competent institutions will conduct their own investigations and determine the institutional responsibilities of their affiliated authors.

3.5. Case Records and Follow-up

ANTEC will maintain a confidential record of reported ethical issues, actions taken, relevant communications, evidence examined, and decisions made. Access to these records will be restricted to individuals authorized to handle the case.

The journal will follow the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and applicable national regulations to guide case management and determine the appropriate editorial measures. Corrections, errata, expressions of concern, and retractions will be published and communicated in accordance with the applicable procedures.