The editorial process of Revista de Gestão dos Países de Língua Portuguesa (RGPLP), from manuscript submission to publication decision, involves several parties: author(s), editors, editorial board, reviewers, and editorial staff – thus, complying with the ethical standards applied by the journal at all stages of the editorial process is mandatory.

Publication ethics and publication malpractice statement

Revista de Gestão dos Países de Língua Portuguesa (RGPLP) ethic statements are based on Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and the National Association of Graduate Studies and Research in Administration (ANPAD) – Good practices of scientific publication – a manual for authors, reviewers, editors, and editorial board members, which set parameters for good editorial practices.  RGPLP agrees and signs the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) and the Code of Ethics and Conduct of the FGV.

Each member of the journal’s Editorial Structure, while pursuing her/his duties, takes responsibilities based on ethical practices in relation to gender relations, religion, and politics, ensuring her/his neutrality throughout the editorial process.

RGPLP has a plan for electronic backup and preservation of access to the magazine's content, in case it is no longer published, the entire collection will be available at the FGV Repository of Journals and Magazines.

RGPLP is committed to ensuring in publication and quality of articles. Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: authors, editors, and reviewers.

ACTIONS APPLIED BY THE JOURNAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ETHICAL STANDARDS

Duties of editorial staff (Editor, Directors, Editorial Department) and to the author(s):

Editor-in-chief and Referees’ Board should manuscripts exclusively based on their scientific merit. They are also responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal should be published respecting the editorial policy of the journal. The publishing decision is based on the recommendation of the journal’s editorial board and reviewers.

Unpublished materials disclosed on a submitted manuscript must not be used by any of the referees’ board members in their own research.

The editorial staff should preserve the anonymity of everyone involved in the editorial process and have no conflicts of interest related to the rejection or approval of a manuscript throughout the editorial process.

• Copyright

The content of submitted articles is the sole responsibility of the author(s).When submitting an article, the authors guarantee that there is no violation of copyright or any other right of third parties. Articles may be cited without prior authorization provided that the source is clearly identified. The journal follows the Creative Commons (CC BY). This allows others to remix, adapt and build on from the originals for any purpose, even commercially, but they must acknowledge the source.

• Plagiarism

Safeguarding the editorial ethics of the studies submitted and published, RGPLP uses the software for checking content similarity/plagiarism (Crossref Similarity Check). Also, it resorts to the collaboration of expert reviewers, who, during double blind review, notify the editorial staff about any significant similarity between the manuscript submitted and articles already published or simultaneously submitted to other journals, as well as other information deemed relevant.

• Article originality

Articles submitted should be unpublished elsewhere, either in Brazil or overseas, and should not be under consideration for publication and/or published in any other journal or other media source, except for works presented in Proceedings of conferences. The content of submitted articles is the sole responsibility of the author(s).When submitting an article, the authors guarantee that there is no violation of copyright or any other right of third parties. Articles may be cited without prior authorization provided that the source is clearly identified.

• Statement of Responsibility and Copyright

Before the official publication of the article on the journal webpage and indexers, the journal is responsible for sending the final version of the manuscript for approval of publication by the author(s), along with the nominal Statement of Responsibility and Copyright (institutional internal model), for signing and validation.

• Retraction

The procedures adopted by RGPLP for filing and publishing errata, retractions, and expressions of concern are based on the standards provided by the indexer(s), which follow the guidelines of the main committees of scientific ethics, indexing, and publication. The main source within the journal field consists in the COPE’s retraction guidelines.

Duties of reviewers

The reviewers who work in the analysis of manuscripts selected for their assessment should be free of conflicts of interest related to the research and/or research funders, not acting at a personal level and observing proper conduct to present their arguments and recommendations to the author(s). They should accept for assessment only the manuscripts that fall into their field of practice/expertise, in order to ensure a coherent and relevant expert opinion.

Reviewers should conduct the reviews objectively, and the observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that authors can use for improving the manuscript. The reviewers advise the editor-in-chief in making the editorial decision.

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor-in-chief and excuse himself/herself from the review process.

The RGPLP journal uses double blind review process. Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others.

The reviewers are required to evaluate papers based on the content. The review comment must be respectful of authors expressing their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper which they have personal knowledge.

Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

Regardless of the screening conducted by reviewers, the editor-in-chief will submit the texts to similarity detection software, using Crossref Similarity Check.

Duties of authors

The author(s) should observe the ethical and practical guidelines, under penalty of sanctions imposed by the editor and the editorial staff, which can suspend or revoke the publication privileges at any stage of the editorial process, as well as to request clarifications and/or further review of the article.

Authors should present an accurate account of the work performed, an objective discussion of the significance of research work, as well as, sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a manuscript for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data within reasonable time.

The authors should ensure that their work is entirely original and has not been published elsewhere in any language, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledge. An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Review articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and provide accurate accounts of the state of the art. The corresponding author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the research reported in the manuscript. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author has a responsibility to keep co-authors posted with the review process. If accepted, all authors are required to give a signed statement that the research work is their original research work.

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify RGPLP and cooperate to retract or correct the paper. If the editor-in-chief learn from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence of the correctness of the original paper.

RGPLP considers as unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior the following:

• Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements (like non-conducted empirical research);
• Plagiarism in all the forms;
• Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently.