The Technological-Educational Journal Docentes 2.0 maintains an unconditional commitment to editorial independence as the foundation of scientific integrity and academic excellence. To guarantee objectivity and transparency, the journal upholds a strict structural separation between administrative and financial management and scientific decision-making.

Scientific authority operates with full autonomy and without interference from the administrative leadership or the publishing entity (Grupo Docentes 2.0 C.A.). Administrative or financial considerations do not influence the peer review process, the selection of reviewers, or final editorial decisions.

The administrative leadership is exclusively responsible for institutional strategy, sustainability, and operational management of the publication. It does not participate in manuscript evaluation or in acceptance or rejection decisions.

Conflict of Interest Policy

A conflict of interest is any situation that interferes with, or could be perceived as interfering with, the full and objective presentation, peer review, editorial decision-making, or publication of research and non-research submissions.

2.1 Author:

1. a) Authors are required to disclose any personal, professional, or financial interest or relationship that could be affected by the publication of the submitted manuscript.
2. b) All funding sources must be acknowledged in the manuscript.
3. c) All authors must disclose any financial interests in corporate or commercial entities related to the subject matter of the manuscript.
4. d) On behalf of all co-authors, the corresponding author is responsible for informing the Editor of any real or apparent conflict of interest at the time of submission.
5. e) Any declared conflicts will be disclosed in the published article.
6. f) All authors must include a Conflict of Interest Disclosure Statement in manuscripts submitted to RTED.
7. g) Authors must submit corrections if conflicts of interest are identified after publication.

Authors must ensure that their procedures and methodologies comply with international ethical standards in scientific research in Engineering and related disciplines, including the proper application of APA citation standards. This assurance must be provided in writing through the Conflict of Interest Declaration form, which is required at the time of manuscript submission for preliminary review. Authors are fully responsible for any ethical violations related to the research underlying the submitted article. Likewise, authors are obligated to disclose any potential conflicts of interest associated with their work. The individual submitting the manuscript will be identified as the guarantor of the work in its entirety and will serve as the primary contact during the editorial process.

Authors must complete the Conflict of Interest Declaration at two separate stages during the submission process:

1. Submit a signed Conflict of Interest Declaration letter stating whether conflicts exist. If the manuscript is accepted, this declaration will be published alongside the article.
2. Include a statement within the manuscript under the section Conflict of Interest Declaration reading: “The author(s) declare(s) no conflict of interest.” If conflicts exist, they must be fully disclosed. Disclosure is required in both instances.

Note: Failure to disclose a Conflict of Interest Declaration may result in the immediate rejection of the manuscript.

2.2 Reviewer:

1. a) Reviewers are responsible for providing an impartial evaluation of the scientific merit of the manuscript under review.
2. b) Reviewers must assess any conflicts of interest disclosed by the author and must disclose any situation or relationship that could bias or be perceived as biasing their evaluation.
3. c) These include personal relationships with the authors, concurrent competing research on the same topic, or professional or financial ties to organizations with an interest in the subject under review.
4. d) In cases where a real or apparent conflict of interest is disclosed, the decision to use the review remains at the discretion of the Editor.

The Technological-Educational Journal Docentes 2.0 (RTED) will reject any manuscript that implicitly or explicitly includes unethical, discriminatory, offensive, aggressive, or otherwise inappropriate practices, or that fails to clearly disclose potential conflicts of interest. Final publication decisions remain under the authority of the Editorial Committee.

Decision-Making Authority

The Editor-in-Chief holds the highest scientific authority and retains exclusive responsibility for the final decision regarding acceptance, revision, or rejection of submitted manuscripts. Decisions are based strictly on:

• Scientific merit and originality
• Methodological rigor and validity of results
• Relevance to the journal’s aims and scope
• Outcomes of the double-blind peer review process

No member of the administrative or financial body is authorized to intervene in, modify, or influence editorial decisions.

Peer Review Process

All manuscripts submitted to the journal undergo a rigorous double-blind peer review process. Both authors and reviewers remain anonymous during evaluation to ensure impartiality and academic integrity.

Each manuscript is evaluated by external reviewers with expertise in the relevant subject area. Editorial decisions are made following detailed analysis of reviewer reports and in accordance with established academic criteria.

The journal guarantees confidentiality, consistency, and objectivity throughout all stages of the editorial process.

Management of Manuscripts Submitted by Editorial or Administrative Members

To prevent conflicts of interest and ensure transparency, the journal applies an independent management workflow when editorial or administrative members submit manuscripts.

• Independent Handling: Manuscripts authored or co-authored by members of the Editorial Board, including the Director General or the Editor-in-Chief, are processed through a fully independent double-blind review procedure.
• Mandatory Recusal: If the Editor-in-Chief is listed as author or co-author, they must formally recuse themselves from all stages of the editorial process. The manuscript will be reassigned to an External Co-Editor or an independent delegated editor with full decision-making authority.
• Equal Treatment: Submissions from internal members are subject to the same peer review standards and evaluation criteria as any external manuscript.

All recusals and editorial reassignments are recorded within the journal’s management system to ensure procedural traceability and transparency.

Transparency and Accountability

The Technological-Educational Journal Docentes 2.0 aligns its editorial practices with internationally recognized standards in scholarly publishing, including:

• Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing (DOAJ)
• Core Practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
• International standards for double-blind peer review

The journal maintains formal procedures for handling allegations of misconduct, issuing corrections, retractions, and addressing other matters related to scientific integrity, in accordance with international best practices.