About the Journal
FOCUS AND SCOPE
Cuadernos Latinoamericanos de Administración is a digital scientific journal. It has a continuous periodicity with a half-yearly closing. It is refereed under the double-blind peer review process. It is aimed to the international scientific and professional community of economics, administration, finance, accounting, international business and related sciences. Publishes original research, review articles and case reports in Spanish, English and Portuguese. The publication format is PDF, HTML and ePUB. It is open access and is covered by Universidad El Bosque. Studies with conceptual, quantitative and qualitative methodologies are accepted. The topics of interest to the magazine are:
Cuadernos Latinoamericanos de Administración is a digital scientific journal. It has a continuous periodicity with a half-yearly closing. It is refereed under the double-blind peer review process. It is aimed to the international scientific and professional community of economics, administration, finance, accounting, international business and related sciences. Publishes original research, review articles and case reports in Spanish, English and Portuguese. The publication format is PDF, HTML and ePUB. It is open access and is covered by Universidad El Bosque. Studies with conceptual, quantitative and qualitative methodologies are accepted. The topics of interest to the magazine are:
- Business, society and quality of life
- Environment and international business
- Organizational development and leadership
- Entrepreneurship
- innovation and foresight
- New marketing trends
- Global accounting processes and international finance
- Sustainable integral
PEER REVIEW PROCESS
The Journal manages a comprehensives review process. First, there is an editorial review. Then, a content review by external peers in a “double-blind” peer review system. Detailed explanation of the main aspects of the process is given below:
Editorial Review. Each manuscript will be reviewed by the editor and, if necessary, adjustments will be requested before the manuscript is sent to peers. There may be cases in which it is decided not to accept the submission of a manuscript because of problems with its originality. Also, the manuscript will be rejected if there is any ethical issue or its focus escapes the thematic spectrum of the Journal. All the manuscript are processed through an anti-plagiarism progam.
Review System. The Journal has a “double-blind” peer review system. This means the identity of authors and reviewers is reserved throughout the process, and the publisher will be responsible for preventing probable conflicts of interest and auditing the quality of the concepts.
Review Process. The arbitration process consists of three stages. The first one is the assignment of reviewers, usually two for each manuscript. The Journal selects reviewers according to their academic degrees, their current lines of research and their most recent publications.
The second stage is the review and consolidation of concepts by the editor. Manuscripts can be approved without modifications, approved with modifications of form, approved with substantial modifications or rejected. In case of contradictory concepts, where one reviewer approves with modification of form and another approves with substantial modifications or rejects, a third review will be requested to resolve the conflict.
The third stage is publishing the arbitration results. This may involve closing the manuscript process when the manuscript is rejected or when is approved without adjustments (this occurs in very rare cases), another case is when there are adjustments to make and verification of this changes. Manuscripts which receive concepts where substantial modifications are recommended may be rejected by editorial decision or their final approval will depend on the success of the corrections of the identified problems. The verification of the adjustments will be done by the same peers or with the help of a scientific editor or a member of the journal’s committee.
If authors fail to make the modifications or if the changes aren’t deemed complete enough to make the manuscript publishable, they will have one more opportunity to make a new revision. If there is insistence of problems in the second verification, the final decision will be to reject the manuscript.
Review Times. The review of a manuscript can last three months on average. This is since its submission until the final decision about its publication. The editor notifies authors of the decision to not publish their manuscript after the editorial filtering if some major problems are detected in its quality, originality or ethical conditions or if the manuscript escapes the journal’s thematic spectrum and scientific approach.
The Journal manages a comprehensives review process. First, there is an editorial review. Then, a content review by external peers in a “double-blind” peer review system. Detailed explanation of the main aspects of the process is given below:
Editorial Review. Each manuscript will be reviewed by the editor and, if necessary, adjustments will be requested before the manuscript is sent to peers. There may be cases in which it is decided not to accept the submission of a manuscript because of problems with its originality. Also, the manuscript will be rejected if there is any ethical issue or its focus escapes the thematic spectrum of the Journal. All the manuscript are processed through an anti-plagiarism progam.
Review System. The Journal has a “double-blind” peer review system. This means the identity of authors and reviewers is reserved throughout the process, and the publisher will be responsible for preventing probable conflicts of interest and auditing the quality of the concepts.
Review Process. The arbitration process consists of three stages. The first one is the assignment of reviewers, usually two for each manuscript. The Journal selects reviewers according to their academic degrees, their current lines of research and their most recent publications.
The second stage is the review and consolidation of concepts by the editor. Manuscripts can be approved without modifications, approved with modifications of form, approved with substantial modifications or rejected. In case of contradictory concepts, where one reviewer approves with modification of form and another approves with substantial modifications or rejects, a third review will be requested to resolve the conflict.
The third stage is publishing the arbitration results. This may involve closing the manuscript process when the manuscript is rejected or when is approved without adjustments (this occurs in very rare cases), another case is when there are adjustments to make and verification of this changes. Manuscripts which receive concepts where substantial modifications are recommended may be rejected by editorial decision or their final approval will depend on the success of the corrections of the identified problems. The verification of the adjustments will be done by the same peers or with the help of a scientific editor or a member of the journal’s committee.
If authors fail to make the modifications or if the changes aren’t deemed complete enough to make the manuscript publishable, they will have one more opportunity to make a new revision. If there is insistence of problems in the second verification, the final decision will be to reject the manuscript.
Review Times. The review of a manuscript can last three months on average. This is since its submission until the final decision about its publication. The editor notifies authors of the decision to not publish their manuscript after the editorial filtering if some major problems are detected in its quality, originality or ethical conditions or if the manuscript escapes the journal’s thematic spectrum and scientific approach.
TEXT TYPOLOGIES
The Journal publishes original research and literature review articles. It also publishes case reports on research about specific cases related to the thematic spectrum. Below are some details about each text typology:
Research Article. The maximum length of research articles is ten thousand (10,000) words without references. Research articles should be written according to the usual structure: introduction, methodology, results, discussion and conclusions.
Review Article. The maximum length of review articles is ten thousand (10,000) words without references. The Journal accepts systematic reviews with a qualitative or quantitative approach (meta-analysis). The purpose of reviews is to review and synthesize the most important literature on a research topic, theory or methodology. In order to establish its current status in the area. The structure of the reviews should follow the usual structure: introduction, methodology, results, discussion and conclusions.
Case report. Document that presents the results of a study on a situation in order to publish technical and methodological experiences considered in a specific case. It includes a systematic annotated review of the literature on similar cases.
The Journal publishes original research and literature review articles. It also publishes case reports on research about specific cases related to the thematic spectrum. Below are some details about each text typology:
Research Article. The maximum length of research articles is ten thousand (10,000) words without references. Research articles should be written according to the usual structure: introduction, methodology, results, discussion and conclusions.
Review Article. The maximum length of review articles is ten thousand (10,000) words without references. The Journal accepts systematic reviews with a qualitative or quantitative approach (meta-analysis). The purpose of reviews is to review and synthesize the most important literature on a research topic, theory or methodology. In order to establish its current status in the area. The structure of the reviews should follow the usual structure: introduction, methodology, results, discussion and conclusions.
Case report. Document that presents the results of a study on a situation in order to publish technical and methodological experiences considered in a specific case. It includes a systematic annotated review of the literature on similar cases.
SUBMISSION FORMAT
Authors must deliver manuscripts following the structure described below:
Title: should have between ten (10) and (15) words. It must be coherent with the research question, objective and hypothesis of research.
Authors information: complete names, not just initials, academic formation, identification number, e-mail, institutional affiliation.
Text Typology: research article, review article or case report.
Abstract: must include essential content of the research. It should state the purpose and describe the main contents of each section. Also, it should contain appropriate keywords, said keywords should preferably be terms between two or three words, and there should be between four to six unique terms. It must be in Spanish and in English.
Keywords: main terms of the manuscript. Keywords should be terms of two to three words and there should be between five to six terms for each manuscript.
Abbreviations: most recurrent acronyms used in the development of research.
Introduction: the state of the art of the research topic, from the point of view of historical, legal, conceptual and theoretical background. Includes the approach to the problem (the general context, research question, objectives and justification), as well as the limitations of it.
Theoretical framework: the state of the art of the research question. Constitutes reference frame of research, research background and theories to be used.
Research methodology: corresponds to the approach of research hypothesis, type of research, analysis of the population involved, analysis of variables, models or statistical techniques to be used in the research.
Results: results presentation using indicators of research variables. It could be done by figures, tables, according to the APA rules in their latest edition.
Discussion: Analysis of results obtained from research.
Conclusions: Contributions of researchers to the solution of the research problem, supported by results and equivalent studies.
References: A list of references should be included at the end of the manuscript. The correspondence between the list and the quotations in the body of the text must be equal. The citation style is APA in its latest edition.
Annexes: these are supporting documents for the research.
Text format
The following are basic instructions that a manuscript must comply with in order to be considered in the review and publication process by the Editorial Committee of the Journal, namely:
Authors must deliver manuscripts following the structure described below:
Title: should have between ten (10) and (15) words. It must be coherent with the research question, objective and hypothesis of research.
Authors information: complete names, not just initials, academic formation, identification number, e-mail, institutional affiliation.
Text Typology: research article, review article or case report.
Abstract: must include essential content of the research. It should state the purpose and describe the main contents of each section. Also, it should contain appropriate keywords, said keywords should preferably be terms between two or three words, and there should be between four to six unique terms. It must be in Spanish and in English.
Keywords: main terms of the manuscript. Keywords should be terms of two to three words and there should be between five to six terms for each manuscript.
Abbreviations: most recurrent acronyms used in the development of research.
Introduction: the state of the art of the research topic, from the point of view of historical, legal, conceptual and theoretical background. Includes the approach to the problem (the general context, research question, objectives and justification), as well as the limitations of it.
Theoretical framework: the state of the art of the research question. Constitutes reference frame of research, research background and theories to be used.
Research methodology: corresponds to the approach of research hypothesis, type of research, analysis of the population involved, analysis of variables, models or statistical techniques to be used in the research.
Results: results presentation using indicators of research variables. It could be done by figures, tables, according to the APA rules in their latest edition.
Discussion: Analysis of results obtained from research.
Conclusions: Contributions of researchers to the solution of the research problem, supported by results and equivalent studies.
References: A list of references should be included at the end of the manuscript. The correspondence between the list and the quotations in the body of the text must be equal. The citation style is APA in its latest edition.
Annexes: these are supporting documents for the research.
Text format
The following are basic instructions that a manuscript must comply with in order to be considered in the review and publication process by the Editorial Committee of the Journal, namely:
- The length of the articles must be an average of no more than twenty-five (25) pages including the list of references, in Times New Roman 12, 1. 5 spaced and in letter size and following APA norms in its last edition. Articles must be transcribed in Word or compatible format.
- Documents are accepted in Spanish, English or Portuguese.
- Articles must be uploaded to the OJS platform accompanied by the following formats duly completed: o APPENDIX 1:
- DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY AND ASSIGNMENT OF AUTHOR'S RIGHTS
- APPENDIX 2: ARTICLE SUBMISSION FORM
- It is emphasized that the originality and content of an article is the sole and exclusive responsibility of the author or authors, and the opinions, concepts, value judgments or criteria expressed in the articles are the exclusive responsibility of the authors, and while they are endorsed in terms of methodological and conceptual rigor by the Editor-in-Chief, the Editorial Committee and the Peer Reviewers, they do not commit Universidad El Bosque. All articles submitted for publication will be analyzed or verified in an anti-plagiarism program.
- The manuscript or article must comply with the application of international standards, in this case the APA standards in their latest edition, accepted for Economic and Administrative Sciences.
PUBLICATION FREQUENCY
The frequency of publication of the Journal is continuos with cuts in the months of June and December of each year. The dissemination of the Journal will be done in print and / or electronically.
Charges:
The Journal of Latin American Notebooks does not have charges or fees for the processing of articles (Article Processing Charge [APC]) sent by the authors. Nor is charged for the submission of articles.
The frequency of publication of the Journal is continuos with cuts in the months of June and December of each year. The dissemination of the Journal will be done in print and / or electronically.
Charges:
The Journal of Latin American Notebooks does not have charges or fees for the processing of articles (Article Processing Charge [APC]) sent by the authors. Nor is charged for the submission of articles.
OPEN ACCESS POLICY
The Journal publishes all its contents in immediate open access through the Open Journal Systems platform. The contents are protected by a Creative Commons 4.0. license of attribution, non-commercial and no derivative works (BY-NC-ND).
Reuses of our content are permitted under these conditions. We request in all cases where reuse is submitted that the full reference to our publication be included, with the DOI of the publication.
The Journal publishes all its contents in immediate open access through the Open Journal Systems platform. The contents are protected by a Creative Commons 4.0. license of attribution, non-commercial and no derivative works (BY-NC-ND).
Reuses of our content are permitted under these conditions. We request in all cases where reuse is submitted that the full reference to our publication be included, with the DOI of the publication.
SELF ARCHIVING
The Journal allows self-archiving the papers or texts it publishes and calls its self-archiving policy blue, according to Sherpa-Romeo’s classification. That means authors can self-archive the final version of the published manuscript or the publisher’s version.
However, it is important that there is the DOI as link to the original publication of the article, when this one is catalogued or registered in a repository.
The Journal allows self-archiving the papers or texts it publishes and calls its self-archiving policy blue, according to Sherpa-Romeo’s classification. That means authors can self-archive the final version of the published manuscript or the publisher’s version.
However, it is important that there is the DOI as link to the original publication of the article, when this one is catalogued or registered in a repository.
PUBLICATION ETHICS AND SCIENTIFIC INTEGRITY
The editorial team, with the support of the editorial board, promote scientific integrity in all journal contributors by adhering to the policies of the Committee on Publication Ethic (COPE), its principles of transparency and good editorial practices, and to the recommendations for resolving ethical concerns or suspected misconduct-improper handling of images, improper handling of the publication process, conflicts of authorship, data fabrication, undisclosed conflicts of interest, plagiarism, misuse of unpublished information by reviewers, simultaneous submission, among others.
The procedures (flow charts) for dealing with cases that represent potential ethical problems can be found here:
https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.2.37
Also, we give some recommendations to the authors and reviewers related to the scientific integrity and expectations the Journal has about each role in the Publication Process.
Authorship. Only an individual who participated creatively in writing and organization of contents of a manuscript should be considered as an author. It is not recommended to include authors who did not have a direct role in the project, such as advisors or tutors, or authors who contributed in a previous phase of the elaboration of the manuscript but did not have any direct and real participation in the writing and reviewing of the manuscript in its different versions. Also, all authors must agree with the contents of the manuscript and must be able to respond individually about the content.
Conflict of Interest. Authors are required to submit a written statement regarding the funding of their research and whether there is any potential conflict of interest that could compromise their results, the interpretation of those results, or the peer review process of their manuscript. The statement should be submitted on the form the Journal has for said purpose.
Transparency. Each manuscript submitted to the Journal is expected to come from a genuine interest in its publication. Submitting manuscripts to the journal for the purpose of fulfilling research projects commitments or as an exercise in an undergraduate major or graduate course is not acceptable. Each submission to the Journal involves human and financial resources, hours of editorial work, and the usual thorough peer review process.
Quality of the Contents. Authors are expected to submit only definitive versions of their manuscripts to the Journal. It is not acceptable to submit manuscripts in progress or unfinished versions of a text from an ongoing investigation.
Scientific Quality. Original manuscripts submitted to the Journal are expected to be the product of rigorous scientific research and must be done under ethical conditions. The journal will reject all manuscripts with manipulated or fabricated information, or manuscripts that make improper use of other works or content protected by copyright. In case problems are detected or gaps exist in scientific quality, including ethical issues; the Journal will follow the procedures established by COPE.
Originality. Recycled texts and self-plagiarism are not permitted. The Journal will review all manuscripts through anti-plagiarism software and if evidence is detected, the manuscript will be rejected immediately.
Reviewers. The reviewer’s role ensures the scientific quality of the Journal. Also, this role is central in the scientific quality of the international discussions in the scientific community. For this reason, we ask the reviewers to consider the following recommendations:
Conflict of interest. If, after receiving a manuscript, the reviewer identifies any professional, scientific, or personal impediment to providing an unbiased perspective of the article, we ask that the reviewer immediately notify the editor and refrain from further actions.
Focus. It is expected that concepts about the manuscripts will be issued with rigor and following a scientific approach. The concepts must not make personal attacks, nor should deviate towards opinions or recommendations without scientific basis. The Journal reviews manuscripts, not people.
Impersonation. The Journal invite its reviewers based on a comprehensive analysis of their curriculum vitae. This involves a review of their academic background, their current lines of research and their most recent publications. Thus, if the reviewer accepts peering the manuscript, it is not acceptable that he or she transfers his responsibility to a research assistant, a PhD student or another colleague.
Improper use of the contents. The Journal entrust reviewers with unpublished manuscripts which generally contain results of research, novel approaches or valued findings to science and the development of knowledge. In this regard, we ask for special care protecting the data and contents of all manuscripts that the reviewers agree to read. Any unauthorized use of such information will be considered a serious fault.
Diligence. The editor relies on the reviewer’s concept to decide about publishing a manuscript, on almost everything occasion. The excessive delay delivering a concept generates an overload on the processes of the Journal and can affect the validity of the contents of a manuscript, among other undesirable effects. For this reason, we ask reviewers to meet the deadlines for concept submission that were initially agreed with the editor. In case of any setback, it is important that the reviewer notifies the editor so a decision can be made about extending the deadline or seeking the concept of a new reviewer.
Retractions and corrections. The Journal follows COPE guidelines to proceed in cases that are likely to involve a correction or retraction of a published text. We should point out that withdrawals will be made when serious ethical and quality gaps are identified in a manuscript. These cases include data fabrication, plagiarism, among other problems that compromise originality, reliability, and results. Also, authors can request a correction if they notice an unintentional error that could affect the interpretation of their results or if they identified an error in the article’s metadata. Corrections will be made when there are fundamental issues affecting the understanding or interpretation of the published manuscript; minor errors will not imply correction (e.g., spelling).
Request or complaints. If a contributor has any request or issue about any journal process, or suspects misconduct in a published manuscript, they should contact the editor directly to the official mailbox: cuaderlam@unbosque.edu.co. The Journal Editorial Team will review such request and get in touch with you for further inquiry, analysis, solution, or action on the case.
Digital preservation. The platform where Revista Colombiana de Bioética is published follows the information security protocols of the institutional repository of Universidad El Bosque. This facilitate access and ensure digital preservation over time. Similarly, all published texts are given a DOI (Digital Object Identifier) to ensure their online location and retrieval.
Indexing. The Journal frequently carries out indexing and updating processes of its volumes in indexes, bibliographic bases, databases, repositories, directories and catalogues. It is made to provide the greatest possible access to its contents to the specialized community of Bioethics in the world and to readers interested in the most relevant scientific discussions in the journal’s topics.
It is also part of the essential purpose of the Journal to consolidate and maintain itself as a reliable repository of peer-reviewed scientific knowledge, easily accessible, in order to promote an impact on the solution of problems and to contribute to more responsible and conscious professional and social practices around
The editorial team, with the support of the editorial board, promote scientific integrity in all journal contributors by adhering to the policies of the Committee on Publication Ethic (COPE), its principles of transparency and good editorial practices, and to the recommendations for resolving ethical concerns or suspected misconduct-improper handling of images, improper handling of the publication process, conflicts of authorship, data fabrication, undisclosed conflicts of interest, plagiarism, misuse of unpublished information by reviewers, simultaneous submission, among others.
The procedures (flow charts) for dealing with cases that represent potential ethical problems can be found here:
https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.2.37
Also, we give some recommendations to the authors and reviewers related to the scientific integrity and expectations the Journal has about each role in the Publication Process.
Authors. Authors should consider the following aspects before submitting a manuscript to the Journal:
Authorship. Only an individual who participated creatively in writing and organization of contents of a manuscript should be considered as an author. It is not recommended to include authors who did not have a direct role in the project, such as advisors or tutors, or authors who contributed in a previous phase of the elaboration of the manuscript but did not have any direct and real participation in the writing and reviewing of the manuscript in its different versions. Also, all authors must agree with the contents of the manuscript and must be able to respond individually about the content.
Conflict of Interest. Authors are required to submit a written statement regarding the funding of their research and whether there is any potential conflict of interest that could compromise their results, the interpretation of those results, or the peer review process of their manuscript. The statement should be submitted on the form the Journal has for said purpose.
Transparency. Each manuscript submitted to the Journal is expected to come from a genuine interest in its publication. Submitting manuscripts to the journal for the purpose of fulfilling research projects commitments or as an exercise in an undergraduate major or graduate course is not acceptable. Each submission to the Journal involves human and financial resources, hours of editorial work, and the usual thorough peer review process.
Quality of the Contents. Authors are expected to submit only definitive versions of their manuscripts to the Journal. It is not acceptable to submit manuscripts in progress or unfinished versions of a text from an ongoing investigation.
Scientific Quality. Original manuscripts submitted to the Journal are expected to be the product of rigorous scientific research and must be done under ethical conditions. The journal will reject all manuscripts with manipulated or fabricated information, or manuscripts that make improper use of other works or content protected by copyright. In case problems are detected or gaps exist in scientific quality, including ethical issues; the Journal will follow the procedures established by COPE.
Originality. Recycled texts and self-plagiarism are not permitted. The Journal will review all manuscripts through anti-plagiarism software and if evidence is detected, the manuscript will be rejected immediately.
Reviewers. The reviewer’s role ensures the scientific quality of the Journal. Also, this role is central in the scientific quality of the international discussions in the scientific community. For this reason, we ask the reviewers to consider the following recommendations:
Conflict of interest. If, after receiving a manuscript, the reviewer identifies any professional, scientific, or personal impediment to providing an unbiased perspective of the article, we ask that the reviewer immediately notify the editor and refrain from further actions.
Focus. It is expected that concepts about the manuscripts will be issued with rigor and following a scientific approach. The concepts must not make personal attacks, nor should deviate towards opinions or recommendations without scientific basis. The Journal reviews manuscripts, not people.
Impersonation. The Journal invite its reviewers based on a comprehensive analysis of their curriculum vitae. This involves a review of their academic background, their current lines of research and their most recent publications. Thus, if the reviewer accepts peering the manuscript, it is not acceptable that he or she transfers his responsibility to a research assistant, a PhD student or another colleague.
Improper use of the contents. The Journal entrust reviewers with unpublished manuscripts which generally contain results of research, novel approaches or valued findings to science and the development of knowledge. In this regard, we ask for special care protecting the data and contents of all manuscripts that the reviewers agree to read. Any unauthorized use of such information will be considered a serious fault.
Diligence. The editor relies on the reviewer’s concept to decide about publishing a manuscript, on almost everything occasion. The excessive delay delivering a concept generates an overload on the processes of the Journal and can affect the validity of the contents of a manuscript, among other undesirable effects. For this reason, we ask reviewers to meet the deadlines for concept submission that were initially agreed with the editor. In case of any setback, it is important that the reviewer notifies the editor so a decision can be made about extending the deadline or seeking the concept of a new reviewer.
Retractions and corrections. The Journal follows COPE guidelines to proceed in cases that are likely to involve a correction or retraction of a published text. We should point out that withdrawals will be made when serious ethical and quality gaps are identified in a manuscript. These cases include data fabrication, plagiarism, among other problems that compromise originality, reliability, and results. Also, authors can request a correction if they notice an unintentional error that could affect the interpretation of their results or if they identified an error in the article’s metadata. Corrections will be made when there are fundamental issues affecting the understanding or interpretation of the published manuscript; minor errors will not imply correction (e.g., spelling).
Request or complaints. If a contributor has any request or issue about any journal process, or suspects misconduct in a published manuscript, they should contact the editor directly to the official mailbox: cuaderlam@unbosque.edu.co. The Journal Editorial Team will review such request and get in touch with you for further inquiry, analysis, solution, or action on the case.
Digital preservation. The platform where Revista Colombiana de Bioética is published follows the information security protocols of the institutional repository of Universidad El Bosque. This facilitate access and ensure digital preservation over time. Similarly, all published texts are given a DOI (Digital Object Identifier) to ensure their online location and retrieval.
Indexing. The Journal frequently carries out indexing and updating processes of its volumes in indexes, bibliographic bases, databases, repositories, directories and catalogues. It is made to provide the greatest possible access to its contents to the specialized community of Bioethics in the world and to readers interested in the most relevant scientific discussions in the journal’s topics.
It is also part of the essential purpose of the Journal to consolidate and maintain itself as a reliable repository of peer-reviewed scientific knowledge, easily accessible, in order to promote an impact on the solution of problems and to contribute to more responsible and conscious professional and social practices around
