Editorial standards

Institutional overview

Universitia Publishing House establishes these standards as a guiding and normative framework for the production, evaluation, publication and dissemination of scientific and academic works. Their purpose is to ensure that publications adhere to principles of intellectual rigor, transparency, ethical responsibility, editorial quality and the international circulation of knowledge.

The publisher recognizes that the value of a scientific publication does not depend solely on its formal presentation, but on the soundness of its arguments, the reliability of its sources, its methodological consistency and its contribution to the development of the various disciplines.

From this perspective, Universitia Publishing House fosters an editorial culture grounded in independent academic evaluation, respect for intellectual authorship and the responsible communication of research results.

This policy comprises five institutional pillars and sets out the minimum responsibilities of authors, reviewers, scientific coordinators, editors and all other participants in the publication process.

Fundamental principles of the editorial policy

Universitia Publishing House adopts the following principles as the foundations of its scientific activity:

1.1. Academic rigor

Published works must present content supported by relevant literature, appropriate methods and arguments consistent with the nature of the knowledge developed.

1.2. Editorial independence

Publication decisions must be based on scientific and editorial criteria, without subordination to economic, institutional, personal or commercial interests.

1.3. Scientific integrity

Honesty in the production of knowledge, the correct attribution of sources and the transparent presentation of methods, results and limitations will be promoted.

1.4. Disciplinary plurality

The publisher will maintain a multidisciplinary orientation, recognizing the diversity of epistemological, methodological and theoretical approaches present in the sciences.

1.5. Transparency

The procedures for submission, evaluation, acceptance, editing, publication and correction must be communicated through accessible institutional policies.

1.6. Internationalization

Universitia Publishing House will encourage the participation of researchers, reviewers and academic institutions from different countries, seeking to broaden the reach of its publications.

1.7. Accessibility of knowledge

The publisher will promote digital dissemination mechanisms and, where appropriate, open-access models compatible with copyright and editorial sustainability.

First pillar: scientific evaluation and academic peer review

2.1. Peer review system

Scientific research books, academic monographs and chapters submitted individually for review must pass an external scientific evaluation before publication.

As an institutional standard, Universitia Publishing House requires the participation of at least two reviewers with demonstrable experience in the relevant field of knowledge.

The standard model will be double-blind peer review, which seeks to preserve the anonymity of authors and reviewers. When the nature of the publication requires a different model, it must be justified and expressly declared.

The evaluation will cover:

• Academic relevance and originality of the contribution.
• Theoretical grounding and currency of the sources.
• Coherence among objectives, methodology, results and conclusions.
• Quality of the scientific argumentation.
• Relevance of the contributions to the disciplinary field.
• Compliance with ethical principles and editorial standards.
• Clarity of exposition, organization and bibliographic consistency.

2.2. Independence of reviewers

Reviewers must act with independent judgment, confidentiality and professional responsibility.

Those with conflicts of interest that compromise their impartiality may not take part in the evaluation. Authors and reviewers are obliged to disclose any relevant personal, professional, academic or financial relationship.

Members of the editorial team responsible for deciding on a work may not replace the external evaluations required for that same publication.

2.3. Editorial decisions

The evaluation process may conclude with one of the following decisions:

1. Acceptance for publication.
2. Acceptance subject to minor revisions.
3. Request for substantial revisions and a new evaluation.
4. Rejection of the editorial proposal.

Reviewers’ comments must be formally communicated to the authors. Authors will have the opportunity to submit a revised version and a reasoned response to the recommendations received.

Final acceptance rests with the competent editorial body, taking into account the academic reports, compliance with the requested revisions and the scientific policy of Universitia Publishing House.

2.4. Traceability of the review process

Each publication submitted for scientific evaluation must have an editorial file recording receipt of the manuscript, the selection of reviewers, the reports, the revisions, the final decision and the authorization to publish.

The documentation will be kept confidential and may be used for internal audits and legitimate institutional evaluation processes.

Where applicable, the book’s copyright page will identify the type of peer review carried out, without disclosing protected information.

Second pillar: ethics and integrity in scientific publishing

3.1. Originality and good practice

Universitia Publishing House will promote original publications grounded in responsible research and academic writing practices.

Authors must ensure that their manuscripts respect the rights of third parties, that the sources used are properly identified and that the data presented have not been fabricated, falsified or deceptively manipulated.

Plagiarism, improper attribution of authorship, undeclared duplicate publication, manipulation of results and the fraudulent use of bibliographic references are considered contrary to editorial integrity.

3.2. Textual similarity

Works may be submitted to specialized textual similarity analysis systems as part of editorial quality control.

The results must be interpreted through academic review, taking into account correctly attributed quotations, technical expressions, the nature of the document and disciplinary particularities.

No similarity percentage, by itself, constitutes sufficient proof of plagiarism or a guarantee of originality.

3.3. Responsible use of artificial intelligence

Universitia Publishing House recognizes that artificial intelligence tools can contribute to certain editorial, linguistic, documentary and analytical support tasks.

Their use must respect the principles of transparency, human oversight and intellectual responsibility.

Authors must verify the claims, references, data and results generated or processed with these technologies. Artificial intelligence may not be listed as an author or replace the scientific responsibility of the people who sign a publication.

When its use has a substantial impact on the research, analysis or preparation of the manuscript, it must be disclosed sufficiently to allow its scope to be understood.

It is prohibited to use these tools to invent results, fabricate evidence, create non-existent references or present unverified claims as verified.

3.4. Copyright and intellectual responsibility

The identification of authors and contributors must correspond to real and verifiable contributions.

Those listed as authors will be responsible for the scientific content of their contributions and must approve the final version for publication.

The publisher will establish publishing agreements that define economic rights, reproduction permissions, applicable licenses and the responsibilities of each party.

3.5. Research involving people, animals and sensitive data

Publications derived from research involving human beings, animals, personal information or sensitive data must demonstrate compliance with applicable ethical and legal requirements.

Where applicable, authors must report on approval by an ethics committee, consent procedures, the protection of participants’ identities and the measures taken to ensure confidentiality.

3.6. Conflicts of interest

Authors, reviewers and editors must declare any interests that may influence the interpretation, evaluation or dissemination of a work.

Identified conflicts will be managed through procedures that protect the independence of editorial decisions.

Third pillar: identification, standardization and quality of metadata

4.1. Bibliographic identification

Universitia Publishing House will promote the unambiguous identification of its publications through internationally recognized bibliographic systems.

Books must carry the ISBNs corresponding to their editions and formats, in accordance with the rules of the competent agency.

The publisher will seek to implement persistent digital identifiers, including DOIs for books and chapters where applicable and where the registration service is available.

4.2. Author identification

The use of ORCID as a persistent identifier for researchers will be promoted.

Publications must record the names of authors and editors consistently, together with their institutional affiliations and other relevant academic details.

The publisher will avoid including titles, degrees, positions or affiliations whose accuracy has not been confirmed.

4.3. Editorial metadata

Each book must have, according to its nature, a bibliographic record that includes:

1. Full title and subtitle.
2. Names of authors, coordinators and academic editors.
3. Institutional affiliations.
4. Available ORCID identifiers.
5. Abstract and keywords.
6. Year, edition and place of publication, where applicable.
7. ISBN and DOI, where applicable.
8. Field of knowledge and subject classification.
9. License and access conditions.
10. Information on scientific evaluation, where applicable.
11. Permanent link to the publication’s official page.

Titles, abstracts and keywords in English will be included whenever possible to support international dissemination.