Code of Ethics and Best Practices
Because of its commitment to scientific ethics and editorial quality, Entrepalavras requires standards of ethical behavior from all parties involved and does not accept plagiarism or any other behavior incompatible with best science practices, in accordance with CNPq guidelines and the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
Duties of Editors
Publication decisions
The editors, based on editorial politics and compliance with such legal requirements as are currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism, are responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal will be published. For their decision, they rely on assessments of the Advisory Board and ad hoc referees.
Fair rules
Editors evaluate submitted manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit and its relevance to the journal’s scope, without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy or institutional affiliation.
Confidentiality
Editors and editorial staff will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, as appropriate.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Editors and editorial board members will not use unpublished information or ideas disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the authors’ explicit written consent. Editors will recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the papers; instead, they will ask another member of the editorial board to handle the manuscript.
Any member of the editorial board, when submitting manuscript to the journal, will not act in the editorial process of that edition
Involvement and cooperation in investigations
Editors (in conjunction with the publisher and/or society) will take responsive measures when ethical concerns are raised with regard to a submitted manuscript or published paper. If, on investigation, the ethical concern is well-founded, a correction, retraction, expression of concern or other note as may be relevant, will be published in the journal.
Duties of guest editors
Focus description
The guest editors should detail the focus of the articles on thematic issues in order to provide clear guidance to authors about the articles published in the issue
Peer Review
The guest editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication undergo peer-review by at least two reviewers who are expert in the field.
Compliance with deadlines
The guest editors must observe the established schedule for scientific arbitration, authors' review and final decision, ensuring that deadlines are met.
Presentation and Summary
Guest editors should write the presentation of the issue number and define the summary.
Respect for ethical policy and code of conduct
Guest editors must abide by the editorial policy and standards of ethical conduct expected of editors in general.
Duties of Reviewers
Contribution to editorial decisions
Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with authors, may assist authors in improving their manuscripts. The reviewers must present a well-founded merit analysis resulting from careful reading.
Promptness
Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.
Confidentiality
Any manuscripts received for review are confidential documents and must be treated as such; they must not be shown to or discussed with others except if authorized by the Editor-in-Chief (who would only do so under exceptional and specific circumstances). This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.
Standards of objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively and observations formulated clearly with supporting arguments so that authors can use them for improving the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate.
Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that is an observation, derivation or argument that has been reported in previous publications should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also notify the editors of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for the reviewer’s personal advantage. This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation. Any invited referee who has conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the manuscript and the work described therein should immediately notify the editors to declare their conflicts of interest and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.
Duties of Text Editors, Plagiarism analyst and desktop publishers
Compliance with editorial deadlines
The text editors, plagiarism analyst and desktop publishers should follow the editorial schedule, ensuring deadlines are met. Any member of the executive team who knows that deadline enforcement is impossible should notify the publisher for any action to be taken.
Confidencialidade
Todos os manuscritos recebidos para revisão, análise ou diagramação são documentos confidenciais e devem ser tratados como tais. Eles não devem ser mostrados ou discutidos com outras pessoas, exceto o autor e os editores, conforme o caso. Any manuscripts received for review, analysis or layout are confidential documents and must be treated as such; they must not be shown to or discussed with others except author, reviewers, other editorial advisers, as appropriate.
Intervention limit
Text editors should interfere with the text only in formal and mandatory aspects of standardization and should make all changes visible so that authors can abide by them. Any intervention in textual aspects should be marked and justified in the margin, in the form of comments.
Duties of Authors
Reporting standards
Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed and the results, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the work. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Review articles should be accurate, objective and comprehensive. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
Originality and plagiarism
Authors should ensure that they have written and submit only entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the work reported in the manuscript should also be cited. Plagiarism takes many forms, from "passing off" another's paper as the author's own, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable. The practice of plagiarism causes rejection of the article in any of its phases, before or after publication. Recurrence in this practice can block a new submission for two years.
Multiple, duplicate, redundant or concurrent submission/publication
Um autor não deve, em geral, publicar manuscritos que descrevem essencialmente a mesma pesquisa em mais de uma revista ou publicação primária (autoplágio). Submeter o mesmo manuscrito a mais de uma revista simultaneamente e / ou publicar o mesmo artigo em diferentes revistas constituem um comportamento antiético de publicação e é inaceitável. Tais práticas levam à rejeição do artigo em qualquer de suas fases, antes ou após publicação. A recorrência nessa prática pode levar ao bloqueio de nova submissão por um ano.Papers describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal or primary publication. Hence, authors should not submit for consideration a manuscript that has already been published in another journal. Submission of a manuscript concurrently to more than one journal is unethical publishing behaviour and unacceptable. Such practices causes rejection of the article in any of its phases, before or after publication. Recurrence in this practice can block a new submission for two years.
Acknowledgement of sources
Authors should ensure that they have properly acknowledged the work of others, and should also cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately (from conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties) must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Authors should not use information obtained in the course of providing confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, unless they have obtained the explicit written permission of the author(s) of the work involved in these services.
Authorship of the manuscript
Only persons who meet these authorship criteria should be listed as authors in the manuscript as they must be able to take public responsibility for the content: (i) made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, data acquisition, or analysis/interpretation of the study; and (ii) drafted the manuscript or revised it critically for important intellectual content; and (iii) have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its submission for publication. All persons who made substantial contributions to the work reported in the manuscript (such as technical help, writing and editing assistance, general support) but who do not meet the criteria for authorship must not be listed as an author, but should be acknowledged in the "Acknowledgements" section after their written permission to be named as been obtained. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate coauthors (according to the above definition) and no inappropriate coauthors are included in the author list and verify that all coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Authors should—at the earliest stage possible (generally by submitting a disclosure form at the time of submission and including a statement in the manuscript)—disclose any conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include financial ones such as honoraria, educational grants or other funding, participation in speakers’ bureaus, membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest, and paid expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements, as well as non-financial ones such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs in the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the work should be disclosed (including the grant number or other reference number if any).
Peer review
Os autores são obrigados a participar do processo de avaliação e revisão, o que inclui cooperar respondendo prontamente aos pedidos do editor para esclarecer dados, enviar permissões de pesquisa, direitos autorais etc.. Em caso de decisão editorial que exija revisões obrigatórias, os autores devem atender aos comentários dos avaliadores, um a um, ou justificar quando não acatá-los, e, no prazo concedido, submeter a versão revisada ao sistema da revista. Devem ainda atender à requisição dos editores de texto para avaliar o trabalho editado no prazo concedido. Authors are obliged to participate in the peer review process and cooperate fully by responding promptly to editors’ requests for raw data, clarifications, and proof of ethics approval, and copyright permissions. In the case of a first decision of "revisions necessary", authors should respond to the reviewers’ comments systematically, point by point, and in a timely manner, revising and re-submitting their manuscript to the journal by the deadline given. They must also meet the request of the editors of text to evaluate the work edited within the deadline.
Authors are responsible for maintaining updated contact forms and follow directly in the system the progress of the editorial process. The journal is not responsible for messages not delivered due to technical issues, spam filters, outdated addresses etc.
Fundamental errors in published works
When authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, it is their obligation to promptly notify the journal’s editors or publisher and cooperate with them to either correct the paper in the form of an erratum or to retract the paper. If the editors or publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error or inaccuracy, then it is the authors’ obligation to promptly correct or retract the paper or provide evidence to the journal editors of the correctness of the paper.
Human subjects
If the work involves human participants, the authors should ensure that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them; the manuscript should contain a statement to this effect. Authors should also include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human participants. The privacy rights of human participants must always be observed.
This Ethics Policy is based on recommendations from Elsevier and COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors
