Statement of Ethics on Publications

InSURgência: revista de direitos e movimentos sociais is committed to publishing and disseminating scientific work based on ethical principles and to promote good practices, involving all the people involved in the publication process (editors, authors and reviewers).

The following orientations are based on the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), which are openly available to the general public.

In case of omissions in this Declaration of Ethics and Good Practices, InSURgência and its editorial board may base their decisions, subsidiarily, on the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

The publication process of this journal must follow the following parameters:

 

1 STANDARDS OF ETHICAL CONDUCT FOR AUTHORS

1.1 Authors must ensure that the submitted work is original and unpublished and that it is not being evaluated for publication by another journal. In the latter case, they must inform and justify the journal's editorial board.

1.2 After submitting a submission to InSURgencia, in order to submit the same work to other journals or other forms of publication, authors must ensure, through express communication to the editorial board, that the submission is published or archived, not being in the evaluation stage.

1.3 After being published in InSURgência, the submitted works may be republished by the authors in other media, with or without modifications, as long as the original publication is cited.

1.4 Authors undertake not to falsify in any way the data presented in the submitted works, as well as guarantee to hold the authorized use of the entirety of the exposed primary sources.

1.5 Authors and authors undertake not to incur in any of the forms of plagiarism:

1.5.1 Direct plagiarism is understood as a literal copy of the original text, without reference to the author and without indicating that it is a quote;

1.5.2 Indirect plagiarism is understood to be the reproduction, in one's own words, of the ideas of an original text (paraphrase), without indicating the source;

1.5.3 Source plagiarism is understood to be the use of sources of a consulted author (secondary sources) as if they had been consulted first hand;

1.5.4 It is understood as consented plagiarism the presentation or signature of someone else's work as one's own authorship, with the consent of the true author; and

1.5.5 Self-plagiarism is understood as the re-presentation, as if it were original, of a work of own authorship (in whole or in part).

1.6 In the event of plagiarism being identified, the journal's editorial board may adopt the necessary measures to curb such practices, guaranteeing ample defense to authors, separately or jointly, and may sanction them with the prohibition of publication in the journal for up to two years and, depending on the severity, communicate the plagiarized authors and the institution to which they may be linked.

1.7 In case of verification of errors or inaccuracies after the publication of their work, authors must promptly notify the editorial board so that the necessary measures are taken in accordance with the journal's Retraction Policy.

1.8 The accepted texts with indication of correction must be revised based on the relevance of the comments made available in the evaluation opinions, and the reasons for any eventual non-absorption of the indications contained in the opinions must be explained to the editorial board.

1.9 Any sources of financial support, public or private, used to carry out the research must be informed.

1.10 The author responsible for including the text in the submission system must ensure that there is complete acceptance by all co-authors of the final version of the article and its submission for publication.

 

2 STANDARDS OF ETHICAL CONDUCT FOR THE EDITORIAL BODY

2.1 During the review process, the editorial board will not disclose information about submitted works to anyone who is not involved with the review process.

2.2 Members of the editorial board must refuse to participate in the evaluation process of works in which they have a conflict of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative or any other connections with any of the authors of the submission.

2.3 Editorial decisions must guarantee autonomy and ensure that all works submitted and considered for publication are reviewed by peers who are experts in the subject, as well as the validation of publications in terms of importance for researchers and readers, always safeguarding the legal requirements concerning the rights copyright and anti-plagiarism policy.

2.4 It is up to the editorial board to decide and publish, when necessary, retraction notes referring to the content contained in already published and distributed editions, according to the periodical's Retraction Policy.

2.5 The journal's editorial board will guide its decisions by maintaining good editorial practices, especially those guided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

 

3 STANDARDS OF ETHICAL CONDUCT FOR GUEST EDITORS AND DOSSIER COORDINATORS

3.1 Guest editors and dossier coordinators will collaborate with the editorial board in relation to the design of the dossier and its editorial flow, committing to follow, as appropriate, the provisions of the section “Standards of ethical conduct for the editorial board” of this Declaration.

3.2 The analysis of articles submitted for dossiers integrates the activities of the invited editors, approving those that are in accordance with the scope of the call and the journal, taking as a reference the journal's publication guidelines, including the provisions of this Declaration.

 

4 STANDARDS OF CONDUCT FOR REVIEWERS

4.1 It is the duty of reviewers to treat all texts received for evaluation with confidentiality and impersonality.

4.2 It is the duty of reviewers to immediately notify the editorial board when they feel unable to analyze the subject of the submitted text or complete the work within the stipulated period.

4.3 It is the duty of reviewers to immediately notify the editorial board when they detect identification of authorship in the evaluated text, aiming at preserving the integrity of the blind peer review system.

4.4 It is the duty of reviewers to notify the editorial board when they detect any type of plagiarism or suspicious conduct that violates the provisions of the “Standards of ethical conduct for authors and authors” section of this Declaration.

4.5 It is the duty of reviewers to notify the editorial board whenever they find themselves in a position of conflict of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative or other relationships or connections with any of the authors of the evaluated article.

4.6 The referees undertake not to use information obtained in the evaluated manuscript, before its eventual publication, for any purpose other than the elaboration of the opinion, being prohibited any use aimed at obtaining personal advantage.

4.7 The preparation of opinions must follow good editorial practices and be guided by collaboration in the production of critical knowledge, and the use of language of an offensive or vexatious nature is not tolerated under any circumstances.

4.8 The evaluation must be conducted objectively, seeking to formulate observations that contribute to the improvement of the submitted text and to the authors' research trajectory.