Code of Ethics

Code of Ethics

The Anuário Antropológico and its publishing institution, the Graduate Program in Social Anthropology at the University of Brasília (PPGAS/UnB), follow the following code of conduct and practice guidelines for editors, authors, and reviewers.

Duties of the Editorial Team

Fair Play and Editorial Independence

The Editorial Team evaluates submitted materials solely based on their academic merit and their relevance to the focus and scope of the journal, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, age, citizenship, religious belief, political ideology, or institutional affiliation of the author. The final decision to publish a material, based solely on the opinions issued by ad hoc reviewers, is exclusive to the Editorial Team, free from external influence, and holds the authority over all content and the editorial process of the journal.

Confidentiality

The Editorial Team will not disclose any information about a submitted material.

Transparency and Conflicts of Interest

The Editorial Team will not use the submitted material for any other purpose without the written consent of the author. Privileged information obtained by the Editorial Team because of managing the material will be kept confidential and will not be used for personal gain. The Editorial Team will recuse itself from the editorial process when conflicts of interest may arise due to competitive and collaborative relationships and other connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions related to the materials. Instead, it will ask another editor on the Editorial Team to manage the material.

Decision to Publish

The Editorial Team ensures that all materials will undergo anti-plagiarism software, screening, and, when approved at this stage, evaluation by at least two reviewers who are experts in the field. The Editorial Team is responsible for deciding which material will be published, depending on the anthropological competence of the material, its importance to researchers and readers, comments from reviewers, and compliance with legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The Editorial Team may consult other editors or reviewers to make this decision.

The Editorial Team will decide when ethical concerns arise regarding a submitted or published material. After examining the publication and verifying that the ethical concern is valid, a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other relevant note will be published in the journal.

Duties of the Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer evaluation helps the Editorial Team make editorial decisions and can assist authors in improving their materials. Peer review is an essential component of formal academic communication and is at the core of scientific effort. Therefore, the Anuário Antropológico shares the view that all authors who wish to publish in a scientific journal have the commitment to cooperate with future evaluation processes of that journal.

Readiness

Any invited reviewer who feels uncomfortable evaluating a material or who knows that their evaluation will be impossible to submit in a timely manner should immediately notify the Editorial Team and decline the invitation, so new reviewers can be contacted, and the editorial processing time is not unnecessarily prolonged.

Confidentiality

All materials received for review are confidential documents and must be treated as such. They should not be shown or discussed with other individuals, except in exceptional circumstances defined by the Editorial Team and with authorization from the Editorial Team. This also applies to invited reviewers even if they decline the evaluation invitation.

Standards of Rigor

Reviews must be conducted rigorously, and comments must be clear with supporting arguments, so that authors can use them to improve their materials.

Recognition of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published works that have not been cited in the material under evaluation. Reviewers should notify any substantial similarity or overlap between the material in question and any other (published or not) of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Any invited reviewer who has conflicts of interest because of relationships and collaborations with any of the authors, companies, or institutions related to the material should decline the invitation and immediately notify the Editorial Team so that they can contact another reviewer.

The submitted material should not be used in a reviewer's research without the author's expressed written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review should be kept confidential and not used for the personal benefit of the reviewer. This also applies to the Editorial Team and to invited reviewers even in case of a declined evaluation invitation.

Duties of the Authors

Standard of Material

Authors of original research must provide an accurate description of the work done and the results, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the work. Fraudulent or deliberately inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Originality and Plagiarism

When applicable, authors must ensure that they have written and submitted only original materials, and if they have used the work and/or words of other authors, that they are duly cited. Publications that influenced the determination of the nature of the work reported in the material must also be cited. Plagiarism takes many forms: pretending to be another author, copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another person's material (without proper attribution), claiming results from investigations by other authors. Plagiarism, in all its forms, constitutes unethical editorial behavior and is unacceptable.

Materials that essentially describe the same research without bringing any identifiable novelty concerning previous publications should not be published in more than one journal or in the initial publication. Therefore, authors should not submit material that has already been published. Originality is highly valued. The submission of material simultaneously to more than one journal is an unethical and unacceptable publication behavior.

Exceptionally, the publication of certain types of materials in more than one journal is justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. Authors and the Editorial Team must clearly discuss and decide on the matter, and the primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.

Authorship of the Material

Only individuals who meet the following authorship criteria should be listed as authors in the material and must be able to assume public responsibility for its content: (i) significantly contributed to the conception, design, execution, data collection, or analysis/interpretation of the study; (ii) drafted the material; (iii) read and approved the final version of the material and agreed to its submission for publication.

In the case of co-authored articles, the contribution of each author in its construction should be recorded at the end of the text, indicating the type of dominant participation in elaborating the piece. For example, one author may have carried out most of the fieldwork while another focused more on analyzing the information and writing the text. Alternatively, all authors may have equally participated in constructing the text. In any case, we request a brief description (up to 4 lines) of how the division of labor among the co-authors took place. We suggest considering the credit specification system proposed by NISO.

All individuals who made substantial contributions to the work reported in the material (such as technical assistance, assistance in writing and editing, general support), but who do not meet the authorship criteria, should not appear as authors but may be acknowledged in the "Acknowledgments" section. The author must ensure that all co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the list of authors and must also verify that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the material and accepted its submission for publication.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Authors should disclose any conflicts of interest that may influence the results or their interpretation in the material as early as possible (usually indicated at the time of submission of the material and/or including a statement in the material itself). Examples of possible conflicts of interest include financial benefits such as fees, scholarships, or other funding, participation in events, affiliation, employment, consulting, ownership of stocks or other capital interests, and paid expert testimonials or patents, as well as non-financial relationships such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations. All sources of financial support must be disclosed (including grant numbers and funding, if applicable).

Recognition of the Source

Authors must ensure that they have properly acknowledged the work of others and must also cite publications that have influenced the nature of the submitted work. Information obtained (conversations, correspondence, personal communication) should not be used without explicit reference to the source. Authors should not use information obtained while providing confidential services, such as editorial reviews and funding and grant applications, unless they have obtained explicit written permission from the authors of the work involved in those services.

Hazards and Human or Animal Issues

If the work involves products, procedures, or equipment with unusual inherent risks in their use, authors should clearly identify them in the material. If the work involves the use of animals or human participants, authors must ensure that all procedures have been conducted in accordance with relevant institutional laws and ethical guidelines.

Peer Review

Authors must be available to cooperate, responding to requests from the Editorial Team regarding the stages of the editorial processing, responding point by point and in a timely manner to comments/suggestions/corrections from peer review, returning the material to the Anuário Antropológico within the established deadline. Additionally, authors must promptly respond to clarifications and approval of language review stages, layout, copyright licenses, etc.

Errors in Published Works

When authors find significant errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, they must immediately notify the Editorial Team and cooperate to correct the material. If the Editorial Team notices that the published material contains a significant error or inaccuracy, authors must correct it and assist the Editorial Team in resolving the issue.