Publication Ethics and Malpractice Policy

Medición y Evaluación del Aprendizaje Inclusivo (MEAI) is committed to protecting the integrity of scholarly communication before, during, and after publication. This policy is informed by the COPE Core Practices and the transparency principles used by major scholarly indexing and open-access systems. The journal applies the policy to authors, reviewers, the Editor-in-Chief, Editors, and all persons involved in the editorial process.

1. Professional and Respectful Conduct

Scientific disagreement is expected and may be vigorous, but all editorial communication must remain professional and respectful. Harassment, intimidation, retaliation, discriminatory conduct, personal attacks, threats, or attempts to use professional status to influence editorial outcomes are not acceptable.

2. Duties of the Editor-in-Chief and Editors

evaluate manuscripts on scholarly merit, scope, validity, ethics, and reporting quality
organize fair, independent, confidential, and timely peer review
select reviewers with appropriate expertise and assess potential reviewer conflicts
protect author and reviewer confidentiality within the double-blind process
avoid discrimination and inappropriate influence by institutional, financial, political, or personal interests
recuse themselves from manuscripts where impartiality may reasonably be questioned
respond to credible allegations of plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, image manipulation, authorship abuse, peer-review manipulation, citation manipulation, paper-mill activity, or other misconduct
preserve the scholarly record by issuing corrections, expressions of concern, retractions, or other notices when evidence requires action
keep editorial decisions independent from fees, institutional hierarchy, sponsorship, and other non-scientific considerations

The final decision to accept or reject a manuscript is made by the Editor-in-Chief. A conflicted Editor-in-Chief must not participate in handling that manuscript; a non-conflicted Acting Editor-in-Chief is designated.

3. Duties of Reviewers

accept review only when they have sufficient expertise and can provide a timely assessment
declare competing interests and decline when independence is compromised
treat the manuscript and all related information as confidential
evaluate the work objectively and support criticism with scientific reasoning
identify relevant omitted literature when scientifically necessary, without using the review to increase personal or journal citation counts
alert the Editor to suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, data or image concerns, inappropriate citation practices, ethical issues, or possible manipulation
not use unpublished ideas, methods, data, code, or other confidential information for personal advantage
not contact authors directly about the manuscript
not upload confidential manuscript content to public generative AI tools or services that may retain or reuse the content

4. Duties of Authors

present an accurate, complete, and honest account of the research or review conducted
describe methods and analyses with sufficient detail for scientific evaluation and, where feasible, reproducibility
ensure that data, images, tables, code, quotations, citations, and results are not fabricated, falsified, selectively manipulated, or misleadingly presented
cite and acknowledge prior work accurately and obtain permissions when necessary
avoid simultaneous submission, duplicate publication, inappropriate text recycling, and undisclosed redundant publication
identify all authors and contributors accurately and obtain approval from all authors before submission and publication
disclose funding, sponsor roles, competing interests, relevant preprints or prior dissemination, and required generative AI use
obtain and report ethics review, informed consent, permissions, registrations, and permits when applicable
cooperate promptly with reasonable requests for clarification, supporting data, documentation, corrections, or integrity investigations
notify the journal if a significant error is discovered after submission or publication

5. Authorship and Contributorship

Authorship is reserved for human contributors who made a substantial intellectual contribution, participated in drafting or critically revising the work, approved the final version, and agree to be accountable for the integrity of their contribution and the work. Gift, honorary, guest, coercive, purchased, ghost, or fictitious authorship is prohibited. Non-author contributions should be acknowledged. The journal encourages a transparent contribution statement using the CRediT Contributor Roles Taxonomy.

Changes to the author list after submission require a reason and documented agreement of all affected authors. Requests after acceptance are exceptional. After publication, validated authorship changes are normally made through a formal correction, not by silently changing the published record.

6. Competing Interests

Authors, reviewers, and Editors must disclose financial and non-financial relationships that could reasonably influence or be perceived to influence their work or judgment. Examples include employment, consultancies, grants, patents, ownership interests, close collaborations, supervisory relationships, institutional competition, personal relationships, or strong professional commitments related to the subject. When no competing interests exist, authors must state this explicitly.

7. Funding and Sponsor Role

All research funding and relevant institutional support must be disclosed. When a sponsor participated in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, manuscript preparation, or the decision to submit, that role must be stated. A sponsor or institution may not control the journal's editorial decision.

8. Originality, Duplicate Submission, and Redundant Publication

The journal considers manuscripts on the understanding that they are not simultaneously under consideration elsewhere. Authors must disclose preprints, conference versions, theses, reports, or closely related publications when relevant. Legitimate secondary publication requires prior authorization, full transparency, and clear citation of the primary source. Undisclosed duplication or fragmentation designed to create misleadingly separate publications may result in rejection or post-publication action.

9. Data, Code, Materials, and Reproducibility

Every accepted article must include a Data and Code Availability statement appropriate to the study. Authors should make supporting data, code, instruments, protocols, analysis scripts, and other research materials available when ethically, legally, contractually, and technically possible. If material cannot be shared, authors must explain the restriction, for example participant confidentiality, sensitive locations, legal obligations, third-party ownership, cybersecurity risk, or contractual limitation. Editors may request supporting information confidentially when necessary to assess the integrity of the work.

10. Ethical Oversight

Research involving human participants, identifiable personal data, biological materials, animals, sensitive populations, minors, field sampling, protected areas, environmental permits, or other regulated activities must comply with applicable ethical and institutional requirements. Authors must identify the approving or authorizing body and approval/permit code when applicable. Informed consent, assent for minors, guardian consent, and consent for publication of identifiable information must be obtained where required. If formal review was not required or the study was exempt, the manuscript should explain this when relevant.

11. Image, Figure, and Data Integrity

Images, figures, and datasets must faithfully represent the underlying evidence. Authors must not add, remove, move, fabricate, obscure, or selectively alter features in a way that changes scientific meaning. Legitimate global adjustments or processing steps must be applied consistently and described when relevant. Editors may request original or unprocessed files to assess concerns.

12. Citation Integrity

References must be relevant, accurate, and used to support the claims for which they are cited. Authors, reviewers, and Editors must not request or add citations for the purpose of manipulating citation counts, rankings, personal metrics, or journal metrics. Citation exchange agreements, citation cartels, coercive self-citation, and irrelevant citation requirements are prohibited.

13. Systematic Manipulation and Identity Integrity

The journal does not tolerate systematic manipulation of submission, authorship, peer review, citation, or publication. Prohibited practices include fabricated reviewer identities, reviewer impersonation, falsified email accounts, purchased authorship, undisclosed paper-mill services, fabricated or implausible data, citation rings, coordinated manipulation of reviewer suggestions, or any attempt to bypass independent evaluation.

14. Allegations of Research or Publication Misconduct

Credible allegations are assessed regardless of whether they arise before or after publication and regardless of whether the complainant is named or anonymous. The journal evaluates the available evidence, preserves confidentiality as far as reasonably possible, informs relevant parties when appropriate, requests explanations or original data where necessary, and may contact institutions, ethics committees, funders, or other journals when an independent investigation is needed. The journal does not require proof beyond reasonable access before considering a well-supported concern.

15. Possible Editorial Actions

Depending on the evidence and stage of publication, actions may include requesting clarification or correction, pausing peer review, rejecting the manuscript, replacing a reviewer, conducting additional review, correcting metadata, publishing a corrigendum or erratum, issuing an Editorial Note or Expression of Concern, retracting the article, exceptionally removing content for legal/privacy/safety reasons, or notifying a relevant institution or authority. Actions are proportionate to the issue and are documented.

16. Complaints and Appeals

Complaints about editorial conduct, peer-review procedure, conflicts, or policy application may be submitted through the journal contact channel. Appeals against manuscript decisions should identify a specific scientific or procedural ground and are normally submitted within 30 calendar days. The Editor-in-Chief determines the response or appoints an independent non-conflicted Editor when needed. If the Editor-in-Chief is the subject of the complaint or has a conflict, that person must not control the review of the complaint.

17. Post-Publication Discussion and Record Integrity

Readers may report substantive errors or integrity concerns through the journal contact channel. Scientific criticism supported by evidence will be assessed independently of the status of the authors or complainant. Published articles are part of the scholarly record and are not silently changed to hide errors. When correction is required, the journal follows the Corrections, Retractions and Editorial Notices Policy and maintains transparent links between notices and the affected article.

18. Intellectual Property

Authors must respect copyright, database rights, software licenses, permissions, privacy rights, and other third-party rights. The journal's copyright and licensing terms are described separately in the Open Access, Copyright and Licensing Policy. Plagiarism and inappropriate reuse are addressed in the Anti-Plagiarism and Similarity Policy.