Ethical commitment

Ethical commitment of the journal Horticultura Argentina

Commitment to ethical approaches to scientific research is one of the fundamental pillars of the journal Horticultura Argentina, where the editorial process is based upon ethical and scientific principles under which only unpublished work is admitted that complies with specified criteria of relevance, clarity, aims and quality.

The Editorial Team is composed of a Director-Editor, an Assistant Editor, a National Editorial Committee, an International Editorial Committee of prestigious professionals external to ASAHO and a body of national and international reviewers. The Team is responsible for the contents published in the journal and for ensuring their scientific quality, promoting the employment of good practices in the publication of research results and in the processing of submitted articles in time and form.

It is the responsibility of the Editorial Team to accept or reject an article for evaluation based upon its accordance with the disciplines associated with ASAHO, namely Floriculture, Horticulture, Fruit Cultivation and Aromatic-Medicinal Plant Cultivation, and with the scientific aims and profile of the journal, accepting the initiation of the evaluation process only when the article conforms with all the journal’s norms.

This responsibility implies meeting the following principles:

  • The Editorial Team ensures that the published articles have been evaluated by a minimum of four or five specialists in the subject and that the evaluation process has been impartial through the application of double blind procedures (mutual anonymity of authors and reviewers).
  • Confidentiality over the texts received and their content until accepted for publication.
  • Impartiality in the processing of submitted articles.
  • Neither members of the Editorial Team nor persons involved in the evaluation process can use, for the purposes of their own research, the data, discussions or interpretations of content of unpublished submissions.
  • The Editorial Team will assess the originality of the articles, aimed at avoiding plagiarism and data manipulation, and act in those cases where, having gone through the evaluation process, doubts persist over an article’s quality, contents and/or originality.

Research articles accepted for evaluation and subsequent publication are required to be the fruit of original unpublished research generating concrete data with objective discussion of the derived results. The information provided in the article should be sufficient to allow other researchers to repeat the work and confirm or refute the findings.

The originality of the published articles represents one of the principal priorities for the journal, for which it is required that manuscripts have not been simultaneously submitted to another journal. To this end and to avoid total or partial plagiarism, the Publications Secretary of ASAHO requires that authors sign an Authors’ Rights letter, in which they declare the work to be of their own authorship, that no plagiarism has been involved and that the article has not been and will not be published in another journal.  

During the editorial process, the first author is the point of contact, responsible for the article before the journal, guarantor of the observance of the ethical principles of the journal, responsible for forwarding corrections and updates regarding the publication process to any co-authors and guarantor of the recognition of all those who significantly participated in the stages of elaboration of the article, from its inception, planning, experimental work, data analysis, discussion of the results and final redaction. The authors are invited to specify their individual contributions that made the production of the article possible.

In cases of doubt or conflict, the journal could request to the author/s clarification and/or pertinent evidence upon which to base a final decision, reserving the right to withdraw from the publication process once the authors have been duly notified.
In those cases where the authors detect a major error in the final published article, they should communicate this to the journal as soon as possible, in order to agree a joint solution, such as the article’s withdrawal or the publication of a correction or an erratum.  

The editorial team is responsible for guaranteeing the objectivity and due justification of the reviewers’ appreciations at the corresponding moment of evaluation, promoting objective judgements that contribute towards improving the publications and strengthening the journal. The team is also responsible for carrying out the first revision of the articles received and requesting that the requisites specified in the check-list are met, for promoting and representing the journal in events of the sector and in the news bulletin of ASAHO “NotiASAHO”, for writing editorials, suggestions and comments to the authors and for ensuring the correct observation of the norms by all members of the National and International Editorial Committees.

The journal is committed to assigning external reviewers for cases of articles submitted by members of the Editorial Team and to guaranteeing that the double-blind process is observed.

Where submitted articles include photographs, these should belong to the authors and should be necessary for explaining the results. For cases where reference is made to figures, tables, etc. included in other articles by the same authors, the original source should be cited.

It is an important aspect for the journal that citations of all the literature considered for the redaction of the publication are included, whether they appear in the introduction or the discussion of the results; it is suggested that at least sixty per cent of these correspond to work published over the last five years and, where possible, in high-impact journals.

The reviewers perform a key role in promoting the quality of the publication, for which reviewers within and external to the country are convened, requesting them to alert the Editorial Team about inconsistencies and/or similarities between the article and others published in other journals or about imprecise data. The reviewers are requested to complete their evaluations within pre-established deadlines, and corresponding claims will be issued when these are not met.