Sections policy

The articles received in the journal can publish it in three sections:

Short articles

Open submission

Indexed

Peer reviewed

Originals articles

Open submission

Indexed

Peer reviewed

Revisions articles

Open submission

Indexed

Peer reviewed

Scientific evaluation policy

Peer Evaluation Process

Contributions sent to the "original articles", "review articles" and "short articles" sections will always be subject to the double-blind peer-review process. If there are differences in criteria between the selected reviewers, the work will be submitted to the opinion of a third expert who will decide whether or not to publish the work in question. In all cases, the identity of reviewers and authors will be protected to avoid, as far as possible, the existence of conflicts of interest in the verdict. The decision taken in the arbitration process is final and unappealable.

The evaluators can recommend to the Editorial Committee that the article be:

• Accepted
• Accepted with modifications
• Rejected

The publication of contributions in other sections will be carried out at the discretion of the editorial committee.

Revision policy

The revision policy constitutes the guide in which it is exposed to how the Editorial Board of Innovation and Software Journal carries out the process of evaluation of the scientific contributions that it receives.

• Editorial evaluation

The first review is carried out by the Editor and/or associate editors; It has a maximum duration of 5 days. Some of the criteria considered are:

1. The relationship between the content of the article with the themes of the journal.
2. Structure of the article according to the rules for the presentation of the article that the journal requires.
3. Adequate technical vocabulary.
4. General aspects of the novelty of the work.
5. Adequate structure of the summary, keywords, conclusions, and sufficiency of bibliographic references according to the norm required by the journal.

According to the result of this evaluation, three possible decisions are made:

• Decision 1: Reject in case of not complying with points 1, 2, 4, and 5.
• Decision 2: Make editorial changes of form and presentation. The author will have one week to make and deliver the corrected article.
• Decision 3: Accept it without modifications, in this case, the article is ready to be submitted to the academic evaluation.

Each of the decisions will be managed and informed by the journal's Executive Editor to the authors, associate editors, and reviewers, as appropriate in each case.

• Academic evaluation

It is done from the double-blind peer review system and in strict anonymity. For this process, two reviewers are employed and in case there is a contradiction in the reviewers' decision, the article will be evaluated by a third party. The members of the International Scientific Committee, the review committee, will use the following form for the review of all articles submitted on the platform.

Reviewers selection

Innovation and Software Journal has a database of national and international reviewers, classified by academic category, distributed by disciplinary areas and institutions, in this way the Editorial Board guarantees that the reviewers are external to the publishing entity and the entity of the authors who send their contributions.

Academic review time

The article can be evaluated up to 3 times maximum, depending on the complexity of the changes and the suggestions of the reviewers. In the first academic review, the referees will make and deliver the first opinion in a maximum period of 4 weeks. If necessary, it will make and deliver a second and third academic opinion in a maximum period of 2 weeks for each case. The total time of the academic review will not exceed 3 months.

Decisions of the academic review:

Reviewers can make three types of decisions:

Decision 1. Reject the job, in case:

• Do not promote a new scientific contribution.
• The result is outdated.
• Verify that it is plagiarism.
• There is no correspondence between the objective of the investigation, the methods used and the results obtained.
• Insufficient results and analysis of these are outlined in the article.
• References are not current, are not under the standard designated by the journal, correctly bounded, sufficient, and are not from reliable sources.

Decision 2. Make changes to the article. On the other hand, the changes have been classified into minimal changes, moderate changes, and complex changes.

Minimal changes:

• Sort bibliographic references correctly.
• Consistent writing of the introduction.
• Appropriate keywords.
• Titles of tables and figures.

In this case, the author will have 2 weeks to correct and deliver the article; In case the article is reviewed a second time, the author will have 1 week to deliver the corrected article.

Moderate changes:

• Clarify materials and methods.
• Reorganize the article structure.
• Remake the introduction (clarify novelty/importance and contribution).
• Synthesize results.
• Improve tables and figures.

In this case, the author will have 3 weeks to correct and deliver the article; In case the article is reviewed a second time, the author will have 1 week to deliver the corrected article.

Complex changes:

• Clarify correspondence between: introduction / materials and methods / results and conclusions.
• Improve discussion of the results.
• Expose better results according to the objectives set.
• Update references.
• Claim materials and methods in correspondence with the results obtained

In this case, the author will have 4 weeks to correct and deliver the article; In case it is reviewed for the second time, the author will have one week to deliver the corrected article.

Decision 3. Accept the article without modification.

Each of the decisions will be managed and informed by the editor in chief of the journal to the authors, reviewers, and drafting and realization committee, as appropriate in each case.

Evaluación final

It is made after the article has been edited and processed by the drafting and realization committee. The article is sent to the author so that, within a maximum period of 5 days, notify the editor of the journal of his agreement for publication. The author may only make minimal changes in grammar and writing. In case the author exceeds the established time, the article will be postponed for publication in later editions of the Innovation and Software Journal.

Article dismissal

In the case of dismissal of the scientific article, the editor will inform the author. On the other hand, he may submit a claim within 72 hours, to which the editor will respond within a maximum period of 5 days.

Frequency of publication

The journal publishes its numbers semiannually and covers the following periods:

• October, November, December, January, February, March (publication: last week of March)
• April, May, June, July, August, and September (publication: last week of September)

Publication fee

The journal has no charge for the presentation, reception, review, or edition of the work submitted or during publication.

Ethics declaration

Innovation and Software Journal of La Salle University is committed to maintaining high standards through rigorous peer review and strict ethical policies. Any violation of codes of professional ethics, such as plagiarism, fraudulent use of data, or false claims of authorship, is taken very seriously by the editors.
Innovation and Software Journal follows the Code of Conduct of the Committee Publications Ethics (COPE) and follows COPE flowcharts to resolve cases of suspected misconduct. Authors wishing to publish in this journal must meet the criteria of the international standard for authors.
The works submitted for publication must be original and must not have been previously published (in print or electronic form). Likewise, the works should not be under another publication process and should not be submitted for such purposes during the evaluation process of this journal, as well as other terms expressed in it.

Conduct code

This code is intended to establish the fundamental principles of the editorial process, the selection, edition, and publication of the contents by order or assignment of their authors and agreement or sponsorship of their representatives.

This code shall apply to all publications and contents edited and published by the Innovation and Software Journal of La Salle University and those who hold the status of authors, reviewers, and editors. Failure to comply with its sections will compromise the integrity of the editorial. The good practices promoted by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) are assumed.

Fundamental principles of the evaluation process:

• Authorship: limited to those who have contributed substantially to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the research. All those who have contributed in this way should be listed as co-authors.
• Double-blind arbitration: the reviewer does not know the article's author, nor does the author know the reviewer who evaluates his work. Two experts in the field submit the articles for consideration to seek a consensus regarding the acceptance or rejection of the material presented. When both specialists differ in their criteria, the judgment of a third party is sought to draw up a final verdict. The reviewer will be independent of each other.
• Confidentiality: obliges all participants in the review process to keep a strict reserve of everything that comes to their knowledge. Any document submitted to the Editorial for possible publication must remain confidential by all those involved in the opinion process.
• Transparency: obliges the editorial board members to maintain transparency about the evaluation process.
• Celerity: obliges compliance with the deadlines established in the procedures for the acceptance, arbitration, and publication of the contributions submitted. The speed is not incompatible with the time necessary to reach a fair decision.
• Recognition: obliges to review the sources contributing to the result, personal and institutional, public or private, projects, investors or other sources of financing, or any other type provided been influential in the results presented.

Section A: Obligations for authors

• All collaborations submitted for publication must be unpublished. The authors of the documents should avoid any form of plagiarism, conscious or unconscious, including autoplagium. If this inappropriate practice is detected, the document will be immediately withdrawn, and the sources involved will be notified. Subsequently, documents from authors who have violated this criterion will not be accepted.
• The author should not send the manuscript simultaneously to more than one journal or other means of publication. If this inadequate practice is detected, the same procedure as the previous point will be followed.
• The submitted submissions must comply with the editorial and style standards requested by the publications.
• All work should indicate the sources from which it is nourished. The author or authors use information obtained in a personal way (unpublished lectures, classes, conversations, and/or unpublished interviews, etc.).
• The fragmentation or division of texts by the authors is prohibited. All text must be presented in its full version to avoid reproducing unjustified publications.
• As the author or authors of the text, they should only appear in the header who or who participated in the preparation of the text in a decisive way. All text based on the collection of citations without argumentation and presented as an original and unpublished work will be rejected by the Editorial Board.
• The authors must reliably inform the contribution made in the document submitted for possible publication. They must also explicitly recognize the contribution of authors and co-authors in previous publications. If the document is part of the products of an investigation sponsored by an institution or program, the authors must give the corresponding credit.
• The authors must not present data or matters that do not exist, submit documents or supposed objects, falsify accurate data, and present deliberately distorted evidence or data.
• Authors should consider and avoid including confidential or classified information in their articles.

Section B: Obligations for the reviewer

• Every reviewer must be fair and impartial. No reviewer can or should evaluate any text of an author with whom he has notable closeness, following the policy that "all participants in the peer review and the publication process must declare all relationships that could be considered as potential conflicts of interest".
• Every reviewer of texts, before accepting a review, should consider whether he has the relevant expertise, as well as the time necessary to evaluate any text with a view to its publication, following the policy that "the reviewer must declare in writing any conflict of interests that could affect your evaluation of a manuscript and should refrain from evaluating manuscripts if they consider it appropriate".
• The performance of the reviewer is not delegable. They may, however, under their responsibility, have the help or collaboration of other arbitrated subject professionals assuming the principles of the Code of Ethics of the Editorial Board.
• The reviewer shall refrain from using any information they acquired during the arbitration procedure for personal gain or the benefit or damage of third parties.
• The result of the arbitration process can only be sent through the channels established by the editorial board through the publishing body of the publication.
• Every arbitrator has an obligation to send the result of his verdict where he explains precisely the reasons for his decision, whether for or against; taking into account the originality, quality of the results and conclusions, clarity of the presentation, updating, and sufficiency of the references, as well as other criteria that are defined to ensure the scientific quality of the contributions.

Section C: Obligations for publishers

• The editors have the responsibility and the power to accept or reject the texts sent for publication, always taking as reference the compliance with the editorial and style norms of the corresponding publications.
• The editors are managed under the imperative of being impartial, honest, and confidential in their decisions regarding the ruling of the texts and selection of the arbitration body, leaving aside any prejudice concerning the authors and reviewer.
• The responsibility to ensure the originality of the works, free from plagiarism or fraud, is the responsibility of the authors. Meanwhile, publishers are responsible for identifying and retracting any article or content found that contains elements of plagiarism or fraud.
• The editors agree to send the contributions' results to the authors.
• Publishers must respond promptly to the authors' requirements and must make every effort to avoid fraud, plagiarism, and other actions contrary to compliance with this code in the publications.
• Publishers are prohibited from publishing any text without the author or authors' authorization once they have been informed that their text obtained a favorable verdict and they have consented to the published version.

Anti-plagiarism policy

Based on its Code of Conduct, innovation and Software Journal of La Salle University maintains an anti-plagiarism policy that ensures that all published works are unpublished through professional applications, which guarantees the originality of all manuscripts. Innovation and Software Journal establishes its position in the face of any form of plagiarism, conscious or unconscious, including autoplagium.
This anti-plagiarism policy ensures originality standards to guarantee innovative and impressive scientific production, reaffirming our Statement of Ethics. Authors, reviewers, and editors also have specific tools for detecting plagiarism: Grammarly, Plagium, CopioNIC, WriteCheck, PaperRater, Plagarisma.net, Viper, Plagarism, etc., open access or licensed platforms that monitor the originality and control plagiarism.

Open access policy

Innovation and Software Journal of La Salle University, following the Budapest Open Access Initiative, declares itself as an open-access scientific and academic journal and allows readers and authors to read and publish manuscripts, respectively, free of charge, in any way free, to increase visibility, impact, and access to its contents.
Free-charge, immediate, and free access to the contents of the Innovation and Software Journal is carried out under the principle that making research freely available to the public encourages greater global knowledge exchange.
La Salle University publishes the contents of the Innovation and Software Journal under the Creative Commons Atribución 4.0 Internacional (CC BY 4.0) license. This license allows others to distribute, mix, adjust and build from their work, even for commercial purposes, provided that the authorship of the original creation and the changes they have made to it are recognized, if applicable.

Copyright policy

Sending a contribution to the Innovation and Software Journal implies an EXCLUSIVE TRANSFER of rights, which includes:

1. Reproduce the article in whole or in part and communicate the Article to the public in print or electronic format, combined or not with third-party works, such as by making the Article available to the public through the Internet or any other network, as part of a database, with online or offline access, for use by third parties;
2. Translate the Article into other languages ​​and disseminate the translation to the public;
3. Create adaptations, summaries, or extracts of the Article and other derivative works thereof, as well as exercise all your rights over such adaptations, summaries, extracts, and derivative works;
4. Include the Article, either in its translated version, adapted or summarized, in whole or in part, in a computerized database and make it available to third parties;
5. Include the article, totally or partially, either in its translated version, adapted or summarized, in a selection or collection of texts;
6. Rent or lend the article to third parties;
7. Reproduce the article through reprography without prejudice to legal limitations.

The author of the articles published in the Innovation and Software Journal may exercise the following rights:

1. Reproduce the article, in whole or in part, and disseminate its content or make it available to the public, in printed or electronic format, as part of teaching content or as a compilation, for use in the academic or research field in the institution to which the author belongs or in those institutions to which it belongs.
2. Publish the article on the Internet or authorize the institution of the author (or any other appropriate organization) to do the same immediately from the date of publication of the article in this journal: within the closed network of the institution ( e.g., the intranet); or in publicly-accessible institutional repositories or centrally organized repositories, provided that a link to the article is included in the journal's website.
3. Grant to the author's own institution (or any other appropriate organization) the authorization to reproduce the article to avoid deterioration or, if the original was in an obsolete format or the technology to use it was not available, to ensure that the article is still available for educational or research purposes;
4. Present the article at a meeting or conference, and distribute copies to the event attendees.
5. Grant to end users of the author's institution (or any other appropriate organization) the authorization to copy, use, transmit and present the work in public and to create and distribute works derived.

Interest conflict disclosure policy

The authors of a manuscript, the editors of the journal that receives it, and their reviewers (internal and external), must disclose any conflict of interest that could influence the manuscript or its revision and approval. If the authors declare a conflict of interest, it must be informed to the manuscript's reviewers. In turn, those invited to review a manuscript should excuse themselves if they have a conflict of interest with the authors or the subject. The journal guarantees that the most suitable reviewers will also be chosen regarding thematic and academic compatibility.

In case of controversy, Innovation and Software Journal undertakes to settle these cases through its Editorial Board. He will be in charge of resolving these cases, and reasonable measures will be taken to identify and prevent the publication of articles in which there have been misconduct cases in the investigation. In no case shall the Journal encourage such improper conduct, nor will it knowingly allow such improper conduct to occur.

If the editor or the editors of the magazine find out about any accusation of misconduct in the investigation, the editor treats accusations appropriately, retracting or correcting items when necessary. Posting the corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies if necessary.

CRediT author statement

CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) was introduced with the intention of recognizing individual author contributions, reducing authorship disputes, and facilitating collaboration. CRediT offers authors the opportunity to share an accurate and detailed description of their diverse contributions to the published work. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that the descriptions are accurate and agreed by all authors. All authors' role(s) should be listed using the relevant above categories. Authors may have contributed in multiple roles. CRediT in no way changes the journal’s criteria to qualify for authorship. CRediT statements should be provided during the submission process and will appear above the acknowledgement section of the published paper.

• Conceptualization: Ideas; formulation or evolution of overarching research goals and aims.
• Methodology: Development or design of methodology; creation of models.
• Software: Programming, software development; designing computer programs; implementation of the computer code and supporting algorithms; testing of existing code components.
• Validation: Verification of the overall replication/ reproducibility of results/experiments and other research outputs, whether as a part of the activity or separate.
• Formal analysis: Application of statistical, mathematical, computational, or other formal techniques to analyze or synthesize study data.
• Investigation: Conducting a research and investigation process, specifically performing the experiments or data/evidence collection.
• Resources: Provision of study materials, reagents, materials, patients, laboratory samples, animals, instrumentation, computing resources, or other analysis tools.
• Data Curation: Management activities to annotate (produce metadata), scrub data, and maintain research data (including software code, where it is necessary for interpreting the data itself) for initial use and later reuse.
• Writing - Original Draft: Preparation, creation, and/or presentation of the published work, specifically writing the initial draft (including substantive translation).
• Writing - Review & Editing: Preparation, creation, and/or presentation of the published work by those from the original research group, specifically critical review, commentary, or revision – including pre-or postpublication stages.
• Visualization: Preparation, creation, and/or presentation of the published work, specifically visualization/ data presentation.
• Supervision: Oversight and leadership responsibility for the research activity planning and execution, including mentorship external to the core team.
• Project administration: Management and coordination responsibility for the research activity planning and execution.
• Funding acquisition: Acquisition of the financial support for the project leading to this publication.

Privacy declaration

The names and email addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party. The privacy policies established by La Salle University, available on its official website, are followed.

Comment policy

We welcome comments on the Innovation and Software journal blog and will welcome any reasonable or constructive comments that contribute to the discussion. We use a filter of intellectual property and words considered offensive. Please note that we operate our feedback system under the following guidelines:

Email Privacy: Email addresses are required to comment and are not posted to the blog or shared. They can be used by the blog committee to privately contact the commenter.
Language and Manners: This blog is for a broad audience, and comments that include offensive or inappropriate language or that the blog committee deems rude or offensive will be edited or removed.
Personal attack comments are not allowed: Personal attacks are not allowed in the comments of this blog. You can question or discuss the content but not attack the author or any other commenter.
A comment is a conversation: a comment that doesn't add to the conversation, goes off on an inappropriate tangent or ends the conversation can be edited or deleted.
Blocked Commenters: Anyone who violates this Comment Policy may be blocked from commenting on this magazine's blog.
All Rights Reserved: The blog committee reserves the right to edit, delete, move, or mark as spam any and all comments. They also have the right to block access to comments from any individual or group of people or the entire blog.

Persistent identifier policy

All the articles and issues published by Innovación y Software have a DOI that guarantees permanent access to the articles, thanks to the constant registration, tracking, and monitoring of metadata. To ensure its operation, the DOI is always displayed as a full URL link, both in the submission of articles and issues of the journal. The DOI prefix is 10.48168.

All the articles and numbers published by Innovación y Software have an ARK ("Archival Resource Key) and a PURL ("Persistent Uniform Resource Locator") that guarantees permanent access to the articles, thanks to the constant registration, tracking, and monitoring of metadata. To ensure its operation, the ARK and the PURL are always shown as full URL links, both in the presentation of articles and issues of the journal. The NAAN ("Name Assigning Authority Number") is resolved by N2T.net (Name-to-Thing) and can be verified in the following link. The PURL service is resolved by The Internet Archive and can be verified in the following link.

Since 2020, authors are suggested registering on the platform to submit papers with their ORCID code iD. It is a persistent identifier that distinguishes authors from other researchers, facilitates the recognition of their contributions, and reduces the chances of errors in their registration. This identifier is requested by the authors through the website of ORCID, a global non-profit organization that promotes the transparent exchange of information.

Authors are also requested to register their institution's ROR on the platform. The ROR (Research Organization Registry) is a community-led project to develop an open, sustainable, usable, and unique identifier for every research organization worldwide. ROR records include basic metadata about an organization. Additional metadata will be added soon. It can support multiple languages and character sets. The ROR identifier is in the form of a URL, and it is a link that leads to the registration form of the institution in ROR.

Archiving policy

This journal uses the PKP Preservation Network to create a filing system distributed among collaborating libraries, allowing them to create permanent archives of the journal for preservation and restoration purposes. If the journal page ceases, the PKP PN has a copy of each item stored between at least 9 data centers to provide access to all items. You can read more about The PKP PLN. A preserved issue list of the journal in PKP PN is available. You can verify the registration of this journal in a LOCKSS network on the page of The Keeepers Registry. LOCKSS and CLOKSS gateways are also enabled.

Interoperability protocol

All the Innovation and Software Journal publications incorporate interoperability protocols that allow their contents to be collected by other distribution systems, such as digital repositories and harvesters. Journals published through OJS (Open Journals System) incorporate the OAI-PMH (Open Archive Initiative-Protocol for Metadata Harvesting) interoperability protocol with the possibility of obtaining different formats for the metadata.

Protocol: OAI-PMH Version 2.0
Metadata formats: OAI_DC; JATS; MARC21; OAI_MARC; RFC1807; OAI_OPENAIRE_JATS; BIBLAT.
Route for harvesters: https://revistas.ulasalle.edu.pe/innosoft/oai

Cookies policy

Innovation and Software Journal informs you that cookies are used for part of the services offered by the website, between users and the journal. The cookie policies established by La Salle University available on its official website, are followed.