Aims and Scope

Cuestiones de Filosofía (founded in 1998) is an institutional journal of the School of Philosophy and Humanities (Faculty of Educational Sciences) of the Universidad Pedagógica y Tecnológica de Colombia. It is published continuously with two issues per year and publishes original articles that investigate in different fields of philosophical thought. Its objective is to promote and make research processes visible, and to support the strengthening of academic networks at national and international level, seeking to contribute to the understanding of the present time, society and culture in general. The journal accepts submissions of articles, translations and book reviews in German, French, English, Italian, Portuguese and Spanish. It has publications by authors from Germany, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Croatia, El Salvador, Slovenia, Spain, United States, France, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Peru and Romania.

In order to improve the scientific and editorial quality of the magazine, the articles are evaluated in the first instance by the editorial committee, which ensures the relevance of the subject and object of research, as well as compliance with the requirements for each manner of publication. Upon completion of this process, the items are sent to two (2) external evaluators who value their conceptual, theoretical and methodological contribution to the field of study. Those who are accepted by the evaluators and corrected by the authors, will be published within three months from the date of final approval.

Peer Review Process 

Once the document is uploaded to the journal's web page, the deadline for publication will be confirmed with the author(s) (this depends on the journal's agenda, which is established according to the order of approval of the articles). Once the response is received, if it is affirmative, the article will be sent for evaluation, which is carried out (almost entirely) by evaluators belonging to institutions outside the university.

Articles submitted to Cuestiones de Filosofía must be original and unpublished; those that have been published in other media, whether printed or electronic, will not be accepted.

Editorial process of acceptance and rejection of articles submitted to OJS:

All work submitted to the Open Journal System must pass four phases in order to be published. In the acceptance and editing process the journal has the following format.

Phase I:

-Submission of the text to the Open Journal System (OJS). There, the document is sent to the journal editor and the editorial team checks that the article complies with all the requirements present in the guidelines for authors.

Phase II:

-Once the manuscript advances to the second phase, it will be assigned to two jurors who are specialists in the central theme of the article, in order to verify its relevance. The jurors have a series of review parameters that will be evidenced in the digital evaluation format created in OJS. The jurors have the following evaluation options, which will be considered by the editorial committee to accept or reject an article:

- Evaluator 1 = Publishable / Evaluator 2 = Publishable: Result = Publishable.
- Evaluator 1 = Publishable / Evaluator 2 = Publishable with modifications: Result = Publishable.
- Evaluator 1 = Publishable / Evaluator 2 = Resubmit for review (third jury): Result = Corrections made and third jury assigned.
- Evaluator = Publishable / Evaluator 2 Not publishable = Result: Assignment of third jury.
- Evaluator 1 = Publishable with modifications / Evaluator 2 = Publishable with modifications = Author must make corrections to make it publishable.
- Evaluator 1 = Publishable with modifications / Evaluator 2: Resubmit for review (third jury) = The article will be Rejected.
- Evaluator 1 = Publishable with modifications / Evaluator 2 = Not publishable = Result = The article will be rejected.
- Evaluator 1 = resubmit for review (third jury) / Evaluator 2 = resubmit for review (third jury): Result = The article will be rejected.
- Evaluator 1 = resubmit for review / Evaluator 2 = Not publishable: Result = The article will be rejected.
- Evaluator 1 = Not publishable / Evaluator 2 = Not publishable: Result = The article will be rejected.

Phase III:

-The article goes through the style and content review process.

 Phase IV:

-The article enters the process of layout, publication and dissemination by the journal's editorial team.

The process for reviews, translations, research reports, etc., is carried out without the assignment of peer reviewers. The review and final considerations are made by the editorial team.

The observations of the referees, as well as those of the Editorial Committee, are suggested to be taken into account by the authors, who will make the requested adjustments within a period of no more than fifteen days.

After receiving the modified article, it will be submitted to a new revision and the author will be informed of its approval. The committee reserves the right to accept the articles to be published in each issue.

The estimated time between the reception of the articles and their publication is approximately four (4) months, taking into account acceptance, evaluation and publication.

The journal CUESTIONES DE FILOSOFÍA may make public, in case it has found them, the following scientific malpractices: plagiarism, falsification or invention of data, individual appropriation of collective authorship and duplicate publication for this purpose all articles are submitted to the Turnitin anti-plagiarism software.

The journal reserves the right to make style corrections, which will always be consulted with the authors. During the editing process, the authors may be required by the editor to resolve concerns that arise both in the evaluation process and in the editing process.

 

Open Access Policy

Cuestiones de Filosofía provides open access to its content, promoting a greater global exchange of knowledge, based on the principle of offering the public free access to research, for this, the published texts have a Creative Commons license (Cuestiones de Filosofía is licensed under a https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/) that allows its use and dissemination as long as the authors and the journal are cited, and it is not used for commercial purposes. For this reason, the authors accept the license of use used by Cuestiones de Filosofía, as well as the self-archiving and open access policies. Consequently, the rights of the published articles belong to the journal.

The journal Cuestiones de Filosofía does not charge any fee for the reception of articles, evaluation or publication, therefore, the publication of articles in the journal does not entitle authors, evaluators and committees to any remuneration.

Cuestiones de Filosofía is licensed under a https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/

 

Declaration of ethics and good editorial practices journal Cuestiones de Filosofía

The journal is governed both by the international standards outlined in the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) as well as by what is indicated in the Best Practice Guide for Editors of Scientific Journals and the Publication Ethics Resource Kit (PERK), developed by the Elsevier publishing group to ensure transparency in the publication process and resolution of conflicts associated with it. The editorial team of Cuestiones de Filosofía will ensure that ethical standards are respected throughout the editorial process by editors, peer reviewers and authors.

 

Ethical considerations for Authors

Before submitting your manuscript to Cuestiones de Filosofía, please read the following considerations carefully:

1. Exclusivity in the application

Papers submitted to Cuestiones de Filosofía should not be sent simultaneously to other journals, as this compromises the originality of the articles and the rights over their publication. Any previous version that has been placed on the Web for reading and feedback by other academic peers must be withdrawn at the time of submitting the article to the journal.

2. Plagiarism and self-plagiarism

a) It is considered unacceptable to reproduce totally or partially texts of other authors without clearly indicating their origin.

b) It is considered unacceptable to incorporate all or part of one's own texts that have already been published without clearly indicating their original place of publication in a footnote.

3. Diligence

Authors undertake to perform the tasks arising from the refereeing and publication process, such as:

a) Revision and incorporation of the corrections suggested by the evaluator.
b) Response to the observations and doubts resulting from the editing of the document (style correction and adaptation to the editorial guidelines).
These tasks must be carried out within the deadlines agreed between the author and the journal.

 

Ethical Considerations for Evaluators

1. Suitability

a) Reviewers should only accept reading papers on subjects they are sufficiently familiar with.

b) If the reviewer realizes during the reading of the paper that he/she does not have sufficient knowledge of the topic in question, he/she should inform the editorial team so that another reviewer can be assigned (cuestiones.filosofia@uptc.edu.co).

2. Independence

The arbitration is carried out under a "double blind" system to guarantee, as far as possible, the independence and rigorousness of the evaluations. If at any point in the reading of the article, the evaluator finds that there is any ethical impediment or conflict of interest that may affect his/her judgment, he/she must inform the Editor as soon as possible.

3. Approach to concepts

a) Evaluators are expected to approach papers from an academic, rigorous and coherent perspective. Very brief concepts, poor in arguments to approve or reject a paper, are not a useful collaboration, since they may generate justified replies from the author, which unnecessarily extends the evaluation process.

b) What is evaluated is the form of presentation and argumentative consistency of the text, regardless of whether the evaluator agrees or disagrees with the ideas presented in it.

c) The result of the evaluation must be beneficial for both the author and the Editor. Therefore, it is expected that, based on the evaluation, the author can rethink, correct or validate his work and the Editor can make a reasoned decision on the publication or rejection of the article.

4. Diligence

a) After the date of acceptance of the request for arbitration, the evaluator shall have 30 days to deliver the result of the evaluation.

b) If, during the evaluation process, it becomes unfeasible to meet the agreed delivery deadline, the evaluator must inform the editor in order to reorganize the initially agreed schedule.

c) Please remember that the timely response to the authors also depends on the collaboration of the reviewers.

5. Impersonation

If the Editor and his team invite an evaluator to collaborate in the reading of a paper after analyzing his academic background, trajectory and experience in research, and publications, it is not acceptable that the evaluator, after assuming the task, transfers the acquired responsibility to a third party (e.g. co-investigator, graduate student, or others).

6. Use of Information

The papers received by the evaluator are unpublished and original. Any misuse or misappropriation of the approaches, information or text sections of the papers received will be considered an ethical misconduct of the utmost seriousness.

 

Ethical Considerations for the Editorial Board

Publication Decisions

The Editor of the Revista Cuestiones de Filosofía (peer-reviewed) and the Editorial Committee are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The approval of the work in question and its importance for researchers and readers are part of these decisions. The Editor is guided by the policies of the Editorial Board of the journal, and is bound by the legal aspects in force regarding defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Editor may seek the support of other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Editor 

1. Transparency

a. Ensure transparency of contributions and the evaluation and publication processes. An Editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without distinction of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, nationality, or political philosophy of the authors.
b. Respond to compliance with international standards of ethics, research, and publication in all scientific and editorial processes related to the journal.
c. Respond promptly and respectfully to questions and notifications.

2. Ensuring Confidentiality

The Editor and any editorial staff should not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the authors, reviewers, potential reviewers, other appropriate editorial advisors, and the publisher, if appropriate.

3. Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest and Factual Discussions

Unpublished materials disclosed in a manuscript submitted for publication in the journal should not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.
Insider information or ideas obtained through peer review should be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Editors should not review an article if they believe that the paper may generate conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the journals.

4. Participation and cooperation in research

The editor must respond when complaints are filed in relation to a published article, the collaboration of which claims the respective credit. Such measures shall be communicated in a timely manner to the author of the article, in addition to applying due process to the request, also issue communications it deems relevant to the competent institutions and research bodies, and if the complaint is sustained, the publication must make the correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, which may be relevant to clarify such situation. Each identified act of unethical conduct in the publication will be examined, even if it is discovered years after publication.

 

Code of ethics of the publication

The journal Cuestiones de Filosofía develops a serious process of arbitration of the articles submitted according to basic principles of respect for the rights of authors and information; in addition, its editorial processes are aimed at complying with political guidelines of the most suitable indexes, databases and bibliographic directories.

The journal considers the ethics of publication as a fundamental mission that protects the rights of authors and information.

Authors who submit their articles certify that their proposals are the result of their own and original research; to this end, there is a format for the assignment of rights which proves that the text is the exclusive and original product of the author.

 

Scientific/Editorial Committee

Functions of the Scientific Committee:

1. To provide support to the Editorial Committee and the Editor-Director-Editor in the formulation of editorial policy.

2. To advise the Editorial Committee and the Editor-in-Chief in the definition of the ethical and scientific quality parameters of the journal.

3. To invite recognized members of the national and international academic community to publish their work.

4. To promote the dissemination of the journal in the national and international academic media.

5. To participate as evaluators of the papers received for publication or to suggest other experts as academic peers.

Functions of the Editorial Committee:

1. Establish together with the Director-Editor the editorial policy.

2. To propose to the Editor, when requested by him, the readers or evaluators for the articles submitted to the journal.

3. To support the editorial coordination of the journal.

4. To promote the diffusion of the journal in the national and international academic media.

5. Participate as evaluator of the papers received for publication or suggest other experts as academic peers.

 

Frequency of publication

The journal Cuestiones de Filosofía is published continuously with two issues per year.

Articles are received on a permanent basis.

 

Intellectual Property

By submitting an article for evaluation to the journal Cuestiones de Filosofía, the author certifies and accepts:

• That the article has not been accepted for evaluation in another journal, nor has it been published.
• That, in case of having been reported the publication of a previous version as a working paper (or 'grey literature') in a website, and that in case of being accepted for publication, it will be removed from the website, in which only the title, abstract, keywords and hyperlink to the journal will be left.
• That once published in Cuestiones de Filosofía it will not be published in any other journal.                                       

CUESTIONES DE FILOSOFÍA is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License .

Created in http://revistas.uptc.edu.co/revistas/index.php/cuestiones_filosofia/user/register

Sponsors

• Universidad Pedagogica y Tecnologica de Colombia

Sources of Support

Supported and financed by:

CIEFED (Centro de Investigacion y Extención de la Facultad de Educación).

FCE (Facultad Ciencias de la Educación)

DIN (Dirección de investigaciónes)

Editorial UPTC

Printing and Publications

 

Formats

1. Academic Peer Evaluation Form (Spanish)

2. Academic Peer Evaluation Form

3. Authorization to publish article (Spanish)

4. Authorization to publish article