About the Journal

EDITORIAL POLICY

Focus and scope

The Revista Facultad de Ciencias Básicas is a double-blind, open access, peer-reviewed scientific journal, which aims to be a channel for the dissemination of knowledge in the Basic Sciences: physics, chemistry, mathematics and biology. 

Its main objective is to become a platform for dissemination and scientific discussion on topics of current interest, both for the international community and in the Ibero-American context. The journal publishes unpublished articles that meet the criteria of relevance, originality and thematic pertinence, written in Spanish, English and Portuguese.

It is aimed at professors, researchers, master's and doctoral students, and organizations involved in research or application of knowledge in different specialties. It is published every six months: the first issue is published during the January- June period, and the second during the July-December period, in electronic format. The printed version is for promotional and legal purposes only. It is printed on demand.

Publishing cycle

The journal receives the submission of articles according to the calls for papers published online, for its miscellaneous or monographic (thematic) issues, without any payment of processing charges (APC) to the author. The Universidad Militar Nueva Granada and Editorial Neogranadina, its publishing house, are responsible for all processing costs. The publication of articles is subject to the order of arrival and the results of their evaluation, considering the submission and publication cycle.

Submission

• Submission of articles for evaluation will be made exclusively through the current editorial management system: (https://revistas.unimilitar.edu.co/index.php/rfcb/about/submissions). Under no circumstances will submissions be accepted outside this system. This seeks to guarantee the traceability, transparency, follow-up and quality of the editorial and scientific process to which the articles are submitted.
• The submission of articles will be made by the author, but not before reviewing the requirements described in the section Instructions for Authors (https://revistas.unimilitar.edu.co/index.php/rfcb/about/submissions).
• The article will be sent without data that could identify the authors, i.e., anonymously. The metadata corresponding to the authors should be registered directly in the platform: ORCID code, institutional affiliation, city, country and institutional e-mail. No further biographical data of the author will be included, such as degrees, multiple affiliations, recognitions, memberships; this information will be included in the profile (ORCID), which can be consulted online.

Evaluation system

• Reception of the article and editorial filter. The editorial team will submit all articles received to an editorial filter in approximately seven calendar days, in order to determine the degree of compliance with presentation standards (https://revistas.unimilitar.edu.co/index.php/rfcb/about/submissions), thematic relevance and ethical principles, the latter by means of an anti-plagiarism software. In case any problem is detected at this stage, the journal team will be in touch with the authors, either to request corrections or to desist from the probable publication of the article.
• Peer review. If the article gets past the editorial filter, it will be submitted to a "double blind" evaluation process by external peers. This system is based on the search for scientific quality; therefore, the selection of evaluators includes aspects such as:
• Thematic relevance. The selection of suitable arbiters in accordance with the thematic spectrum of the journal and with the particular subject of each article submitted for evaluation.
• Scientific trajectory. Verification of the academic degree of each evaluator (preferably with a doctoral degree), his or her publications and impact as a researcher in the last five years.
• Geographical distribution. Balanced participation of national and international researchers that contributes to the consolidation of scientific knowledge networks and prevents conflicts of interest of any kind.
• The selected reviewers will review the scientific and linguistic quality of the article.
• Scientific quality. Related to the contributions to the research, the concordance between objective, results and conclusions; the veracity of the data, the defined object of study, the methodological rigor of the research and its originality, as well as the relevance and the contribution it makes to its area of knowledge.
• Linguistic quality. Refers to compliance with grammatical and orthotypographic aspects, as well as its discursive coherence and the use of quality bibliographic sources.

Result of the evaluation and corrections.

The authors will receive the evaluation concept in a maximum of six months, according to the volume of articles under evaluation, and the response of the arbitration by the invited evaluators. According to the evaluator's concept, articles may be: approved without modifications, approved with minor modifications, approved with major modifications or rejected.

The peer reviewer will verify the corrections made by the authors if necessary, and rejected articles may not be resubmitted for future evaluation cycles. If the peer reviewers suggest modifications to the article, the editor will ask the authors to submit a letter of presentation of the corrected version or letter of reply, in which they must explain each change they made, as well as how they did or did not follow, the recommendations of the peer reviewers backed by academic or scientific reasons. The corrected versions will be reviewed by the peer reviewers and the editor; following these reviews, the final notification of approval or rejection of the article will be sent.

The concepts issued by the peer reviewers on the articles are an input to support and justify the final decision of the Editor and are not opinions that bind the Journal. It is the Editor's right to determine the number of peer reviewers necessary to decide the publication or rejection of each article according to his criteria on the quality of the article or the publication period of the issue to which it was submitted. In the event that an article receives opposing concepts, the Editor may resort to new peer reviewers or issue his own concept on the article to settle contradictory evaluation results.

Publication and dissemination process

• Proofreading. Articles approved by the editor, subject to the academic criteria presented during peer review, will undergo a professional editing process that begins with proofreading. This consists of a review of the text's wording, syntax and spelling, as well as the following of editorial conventions and the use of sources and citation. When the authors are notified of these corrections, they will have seven calendar days to approve and complete the correction. After this time, if the authors do not send their response, the journal will assume that they have approved all the corrections sent, and will move on to the layout phase.
• Cleaning of the text and layout. The final version resulting from proofreading the article will be adjusted to the design layout of the magazine. This is known as layout.
• Art layout review and approval. The editor responsible for the journal and the authors will make a final review to provide final observations, if applicable, and approve the article for publication. The authors are primarily responsible for reviewing and approving this final version; they will have a maximum of five calendar days to give their approval; if they do not receive a response, it is assumed that the artwork has been approved. After the magazine receives the approval, no claims or adjustment requests may be made. This last review will result in the final version for publication.
• Publication. Once the editorial process has been completed, the articles will be published online.
• Post-publication. Content published in the journal will undergo XML JATS tagging to ensure its online visibility and inclusion in indexing and abstracting systems. The editors will work hand in hand with the post-publication editor of Editorial Neogranadina to guarantee dissemination strategies that will allow the published articles to reach the main audience of their discipline.

Editorial structure

The journal is composed of an editor, who has an editorial team, as well as an editorial and scientific committee. Its structuring, editing and dissemination process is monitored directly by Editorial Neogranadina, and externally by reviewers, previously selected by the editor.

Selection of members and criteria

• The editor, committee members and evaluators must have a verifiable academic and scientific trajectory, with current publications (within the last five years) in indexed journals and visible in the main international indexing systems, and a level of training in the area of knowledge at the master's or doctoral level.
• The permanence of the members of the journal's editorial team is subject to periodic evaluations by Editorial Neogranadina, to determine their contribution to the management, scientific quality and visibility of the journal.
• In order to avoid possible conflicts of interest and inbreeding, the journal, with the advice of Editorial Neogranadina, reserves the right to admit members to with affiliation to the publishing entity (Universidad Militar Nueva Granada) to its committees.

Functions

• Editorial and scientific committee. Advisory bodies to the Editor, when required for decision making on policy, strategies and editorial projects of the journal, under scientific criteria and to improve the impact of publication. They advise the editor in defining thematic trends, positioning strategies and orientations of the journal, as well as in supporting the fulfillment and adoption of editorial quality parameters of the publication.
• Editor. The editor is in charge of consolidating editorial policies, as well as managing and making decisions on each article published in the journal. The editor leads the process of evaluation and editing of the article, requesting from the author the necessary revisions to achieve a publishable version of the article.

The editor carries out the selection, evaluation and follow-up of the reviewers who are part of the arbitration process, guaranteeing the transparency and efficiency of such process, oriented to the optimum scientific and editorial quality.

As part of the positioning and visibility of the journal in the academic and scientific context of the discipline, the editor and his team will be responsible for indexing, dissemination and diffusion of the published content, based on the participation in scientific events and the inclusion or updating of the journal in international systems and databases, with the advice of Editorial Neogranadina.  

• Editorial Assistant. In charge of supporting the journal's editorial processes and establishing an immediate communication liaison between the editors and Editorial Neogranadina. His/her functions include monitoring the editorial processes and ensuring the proper review and registration of the metadata of each article by means of the current editorial management system. He/ she is also responsible for publishing issues of the journal.
• Reviewers. They are researchers specialized in the lines that make up the thematic spectrum defined by the journal, with the ability to critically and scientifically evaluate the articles, to identify the contributions to the discipline, based on the criteria defined in the review process and its guidelines.

STATEMENT OF ETHICS AND BEST PRACTICES

The ethical principles adopted by the journal are derived from the following organizations that suggest concepts, guidelines, codes and procedures of widespread international use:

• Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE): reference point in ethical aspects of editorial practices at the author, editor, committee members and reviewers’ level.
• Council of Science Editors (CSE): organization for issues of integrity of scientific publications, conflicts of interest, licensing and authorship, among others.
• International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE): committee dedicated mainly to aspects of anonymity, informed consent and protection of individuals participating in research published in the journal.

The journal also recognizes and adopts the Principles of transparency and best practices in scholarly publishing defined and endorsed by DOAJ, OASPA and WAME; the recommendations consigned in the document known as the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) on the proper use of citation metrics and the principles and responsibilities established by the Singapore Declaration on Scientific Integrity.

In addition, the journal recognizes the provisions of the UMNG Vice-Rectory of Research for compliance with art. 8, literal G of Law 23 of 1982 of the Republic of Colombia regarding the original and unpublished duty of the works to be published.

Considering the parameters established by the aforementioned resources, the journal has defined the following ethical guidelines for all the actors of its publication processes according to their respective roles in the editorial cycle of each article:

Authors

1. Authors who submit articles to the journal undertake to guarantee respect for copyright, as well as the protection of information and other aspects related to the development and publication of the research.
2. The authors undertake to present the research clearly and honestly, without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate manipulation of the data.
3. Only researchers with (1) graduate degrees or (2) who are candidates to obtain graduate degrees at the time of submitting an article will be considered as authors of the article for this publication. Teachers, undergraduate student advisors, or research assistants may be included as co-authors of the article if their contribution to the development of the article warrants it and is endorsed by the main or corresponding author. Otherwise, their names may only be included in the acknowledgements of the article.
4. The author must guarantee the originality and unedited nature of the article, that is, that its elements are unique, that it does not present plagiarism or self-plagiarism, nor previous publication (total or partial) in another medium under any model. Also, submissions with simultaneous submission in other publications will be rejected, as well as articles that make improper use of texts protected by copyright. To verify this, the journal processes the articles with anti-plagiarism software at the time of submission.
5. Conflicts of interest shall be disclosed in a timely manner and duly declared in the article.
6. The authors included in the research assume, in its totality, the responsibility for its content and the actions that may derive from it.
7. It is the obligation of the researchers to acknowledge the participation of the authors who have really contributed to the article, without resorting to false authorship or the inclusion of authors who do not contribute to the preparation of the research. In this sense, they will declare the specific contribution made by each co-author in the letter that accompanies the submission of the article.
8. Authors adhere to the evaluation model defined by the journal; therefore, they commit to providing a timely, professional and respectful response to the observations made by the editor, peer reviewer and production editor, at the various stages of the process.
9. It is considered inappropriate conduct to submit articles to a review process without the real intention of remaining in it. The withdrawal of an article after it has been approved, and during the editorial process, must be duly justified. Authors who are identified as making use of the journal to improve their articles through arbitration without the intention of publishing them, will be penalized for this practice. The journal will not process new article submissions from such authors.

Editor

1. The editor undertakes to ensure the proper development of the various processes of the journal, in an ethical manner and assumes responsibility for its publication.
2. The editor will make fair and impartial decisions, regardless of the context, ensuring a fair and appropriate peer review process for authors.
3. He/she will adopt editorial policies that guarantee maximum transparency and honesty during the evaluation, editing and publication of the article.
4. The editor protects the integrity of the journal, issuing corrections and retractions derived from the editorial process or from suspicious ethical practices that are detrimental to the scientific quality of the articles published by the journal. To carry out these processes, the editor shall adopt the Retraction Guidelines established by COPE.
5. The editor will follow up in a timely manner on inappropriate conduct by reviewers, authors or committee members on a continuous monitoring basis.
6. All studies involving the participation of humans or animals should be critically evaluated for compliance with international ethical standards, which have defined the corresponding guidelines, and should be accompanied by a letter of approval from the ethics committee.
7. Authors, reviewers and committee members will have prior knowledge of what is expected of them, based on the editorial policies, guidelines and formats defined by the editor, to ensure the appropriate use and management of content.
8. The editor will express the possible conflicts of interest that he/she may have in the reception and evaluation of an article, in order to make a management decision that does not compromise any process of the journal.

Evaluators

1. The evaluator will be selected by the editor and the editorial team, based on the fulfillment of criteria such as: academic background, number of publications in recognized sources, and impact of his/her production in the field.
2. The evaluator agrees to accept the reading of an article, if his/her level of experience, knowledge and current commitments allow him/her to issue an argued and timely concept.
3. The evaluator assumes the responsibility of guaranteeing a sufficient review, which allows the authors to understand the reasons for his/her concept, and which includes the evaluation of methodological, content and structural aspects.
4. It is considered an inappropriate practice to impersonate another individual during the review process. The responsibility for the review process is assumed by the researcher who has been called to be the reviewer. Under no circumstance is the participation of a third party (e.g., research assistants, doctoral students, graduate students, monitors, other colleagues) accepted without the consent of the editor.
5. It will be the responsibility and commitment of the evaluator to declare in a timely manner any conflicts of interest that may arise in the evaluation of an assigned article. Conflicts may be personal, financial, intellectual or professional.
6. It is considered inappropriate conduct on the part of the reviewer to use material from an article he/she is reviewing. Under no circumstance, are the evaluators authorized to use complete or partial data from the research assigned for review. Likewise, it is inappropriate for the evaluator to accept to review research that is very active and similar to any of the research he/she is developing.
7. It is the evaluator's responsibility to give timely response to the requests related to the article he/she is reading, according to the time periods agreed with the journal. Failing this, the reviewer must notify the editor of any changes in the delivery schedule of his/her concept, so as not to affect the process for the authors or the journal.
8. The reviewer has read, understands and follows the editorial policies defined by the journal.
9. The evaluator will notify the journal of any identified inappropriate conduct in the article being evaluated, and will provide arguments and support for his/her presumption: plagiarism, fabrication of data, manipulation of results, duplication of publication, among others.
10. The evaluation process will be carried out based on the instructions provided by the journal, in its platforms and formats.
11. The evaluator should refrain from suggesting to authors to cite him/her or his/her colleagues, in order to generate an increase in the citation. If such a suggestion is made, it should be based on duly justified academic, scientific or technical reasons.
12. The evaluator will remain active in the evaluation process, if he/she suggests corrections, so that the editor can count on his/her criteria and advice to verify that the evaluated article was sufficiently and coherently adjusted. However, as the arbitration process is a space for academic interaction, the evaluator should be available to delve deeper into some aspects of his/her concept, so that the editor or authors can resolve doubts or better understand the recommendations.

Publisher

1. Editorial Neogranadina, the publishing house of the Universidad Militar Nueva Granada, shall guarantee the permanent availability and preservation of all research material published by the journal.
2. Editorial Neogranadina shall provide the editorial team with all the necessary means to identify and prevent the publication of articles whose authors have engaged in research misconduct. If the editorial team should find that a submission or a published article constitutes an incursion into such misconduct, Editorial Neogranadina shall facilitate the prompt publication of errata, clarifications or retractions by the journal, depending on the seriousness of the conduct identified.

If an author, evaluator or reader wishes to report a malpractice or a problem he/she has identified in a published article, as well as to refer to difficulties or differences he/she has had with any member of the editorial team or in the development of a process in the journal, he/she should first contact the editorial team through the e-mails revista.faccienbasic@unimilitar.edu.co or asistenteeditorial.revistas2@unimilitar.edu.co  to seek solutions or clarifications regarding the issues raised. In the event that the editorial team is unable to explain the concerns raised or implement a solution to them, authors, evaluators and readers may communicate these same concerns to Editorial Neogranadina through the mail editorial.neogranadina@unimilitar.edu.co  so that a solution agreed upon by all parties can be defined.

Access and copyright

Processing and publication costs are assumed by the Universidad Militar Nueva Granada, in the interest of promoting scientific communication and contributing to the production, validation and dissemination of arbitrated scientific knowledge.

Likewise, the journal establishes the relationship with its readers through the use of the Creative Commons 4.0 "Attribution - Noncommercial - No Derivative" license, in its latest version, which allows:

• Downloading and sharing, as long as the authorship of the work is acknowledged, and without making any modifications to it, nor commercializing it.
• That the author shares and self-archives the article in his/her profiles, social networks and online repositories.

Regarding the relationship of the authors with the journal, an ethical commitment and a cession of rights are requested, under the conditions of the letter-format of Editorial Neogranadina, which contemplates the following elements:

• The author undertakes to ensure the proper use of sources used in the development of his/her research, citing and including the corresponding references. The University is exempted from any liability that may arise from the inappropriate use of other works.
• Compliance with ethical standards and scientific integrity is the responsibility of the authors. The University is exempted from any liability that may arise from ethical malpractice incurred by the author during the creation, development and publication of the work, and that may lead to manipulation, error or falsification of its data and results.
• The co-author will only be the individual who has a creative and fundamental participation in the preparation of the work. In case of conflicts in terms of authorship, it is the duty of the corresponding author to account for the contribution of each co-author in the article. Subsequent inclusions will not be accepted; however, if the withdrawal of the name of any author is requested, the journal will ask for an authorization signed by all the authors who are part of the article (including the author who withdraws from the publication), explaining the reasons for the request.

The Revista Facultad de Ciencias Básicas is an open access academic journal whose content is available free of charge to any user or institution. Users are authorized to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search or refer to the entire text of the articles or any other possible use within the legal framework contemplated by our CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, without prior consultation or authorization from the editorial team or Editorial Neogranadina. This is in accordance with the definition of open access proposed by the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI).

Digital preservation and self-archiving

The journal uses the Portico system to create a permanent archive backup for the preservation and restoration of its published contents.

The self-archiving policy, according to the Sherpa Romeo classification, corresponds to the possibility of depositing the post print (last version of the article after the peer review process) and the editor's version, and is designated with the color blue.