Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and publication malpractice statement

Bordon is a Journal associated to the Spanish National Research Council (CSIC). The Spanish Pedagogical Society (SEP) adopts the Code of Good Scientific Practice approved by the CSIC in March 2010. All articles published in Bordón must therefore abide by the principles and ethical criteria in that Code (available in Spanish and English at:

Code of Good Scientific Practices of CSIC (pdf 1,1 MB) [Download]

Accountability of authors in multidisciplinary publications (pdf 122 KB)   [Downoad]


Misconduct in research activity

 Science as the search for knowledge is by its very principles the enemy of fraud. Nevertheless, researchers may be tempted to stray from this in seeking undeserved credit, or financial gain either personally or for the Institution. This sort of deviation is the biggest threat to good scientific practices and

if it happens, the researcher is held accountable for it. Misconduct includes:

–         Exaggerated interpretation of data.

–         Falsification of data or tests to fit a hypothesis.

–         Fabrication of data and discoveries.

–         Plagiarism of the work of others.

Effective mechanisms for fighting this include:

–         Requiring the researcher to submit any new contribution to peer review so other colleagues can check results.

–         Disapproval and fight against fraud by the scientific community.

–         Coordination among all stakeholders involved in scientific research to ensure the effectiveness of the fight against fraud.



 Publication of all results obtained with the aid of public funds is a fundamental activity of any research work since it is the only way to submit the findings to the international scientific community for review.

 Publication of results

–         Researchers shall always make an effort to publish their results and their possible interpretations in an open, honest, transparent and exact  manner. This includes the publication of those results not in line with the given hypothesis.

–         Publications of fragments of the work or part of the work separately is only acceptable if the publisher so requires or by reason of extensions.

–         Researchers shall not unduly withhold the publications of any finding from projects financed with public aid unless this can be justified by commercial arrangements or by the nature of its legal protection.

–         Research results obtained under an agreement shall be published in accordance with the terms contained therein.

–         Verbal communications of results shall follow the same rules as for publications, avoiding in each case to overstate the importance and practical applications of the results.

–         In case an error is detected in a publication, it must be revealed in publications of the same standard and if serious, the publication must be withdrawn.

–         The “open access” would take the same criteria than other kind of publications, but always in accordance with institutional policy. In this regard, in 2006, the CSIC joined the Berlin Declaration for the “open access” to knowledge (Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities), which favours and promotes the open access to scientific and academic output.

 Authorship of publications

–         In order to be credited as author of a publication the researcher in question needs to either (i) have participated in the proposal and work design, and/or (ii) have carried out the experimental part, and/or (iii) analyzed and interpreted the results and its debate on whether it is state of the art.

–         All researchers who have participated significantly in the research work must appear as authors of the publication.

–         All authors of a publication, unless otherwise specified, must know the text and be responsible for its content.

–         The order of the mentioned authors shall be decided in accordance with the guidelines normally accepted in their field of work and must be known to all of them.

–         The work and contribution of collaborators and technical staff contributions must be properly acknowledged.

–         Besides the authors, the institutions or centers in which the research has been executed or those they belong to, must be mentioned. Grants, financial support or sponsorships must also be declared and thanked, except when declined.

–         Likewise, any conflict of interests must be known.

 Previous authors recognition

–         The authors must mention and make reference in their publications to all the previous literature connected with such publications.

–         Previous publications which are not essential for the research shall not be included.

 Peer review of scientific publications

Peer review is a method used to validate written research in order to evaluate its quality and scientific rigor. This method opens the work to scrutiny, annotation or edition by other authors with similar knowledge to that of the researcher. Currently, scientific publications are only accepted for publication in scientific journals, after peer review.

–         The scientist, as reviewer or publisher, must avoid any kind of conflict of interest (personnel, academic, commercial, etc.). Likewise, evaluations, reasonings and opinions must be clear and accurate, and subject to enough discussion in order to be impartial.

The evaluation process must remain strictly confidential. Reviewers and publishers must not use the information which they might have accessed without previous, specific and express authorization by the author.

Authors not fufilling our ethic code will not able to submit new articles in our journal.