Princípios Éticos / Ethical Values

Da parte dos autores
1. Os autores devem apresentar com clareza as fontes trabalhadas e a organização de dados que realizou a partir destas.

2. Os dados levantados pelos autores para a escrita dos seus textos devem ser retidos por eles após a publicação, uma vez que, caso futuramente seja necessária alguma revisão editorial, os mesmos podem ser solicitados pela equipe editorial da Revista e até mesmo tornados públicos para fins de esclarecimentos.

3. Os autores devem assegurar que tenham escrito obras totalmente originais, e em caso de utilização de trabalho e/ou palavras de outros, é obrigatório apresentar a citação/referência. O plágio pode ser caracterizado de diversas formas, desde a cópia de fragmentos de outros textos até o uso de resultados de pesquisa. Em todas as suas formas, o plágio constitui um comportamento de publicação antiético, sendo inaceitável.

4. Orientamos que o envio, simultaneamente, de um mesmo manuscrito para mais de um periódico constitui um comportamento antiético.

5. Autores devem citar publicações que foram influentes na determinação da natureza do trabalho relatado. Informações obtidas de forma, tais como em conversas, correspondências, ou discussões com terceiros, não devem ser usadas ou relatadas sem explícita permissão escrita da fonte. Informações oriundas de serviços confidenciais, tais como manuscritos referidos ou aplicações para bolsas, não deverão ser utilizadas sem explícita permissão escrita do autor do trabalho envolvido nestes serviços.

6. A revista publica imagens, desde apresentada a autorização legal para a publicação daquelas que ainda são regidas pela legislação de direito autoral vigente no país.

7. A autoria deve ser limitada àqueles que tenham feito contribuições significativas à concepção, estruturação, execução, ou interpretação do estudo relatado. Todos aqueles que tenham feito uma contribuição significativa devem ser listadas como coautores. O autor correspondente deve assegurar que todos os coautores apropriados e não os coautores inapropriados sejam incluídos no trabalho, e que todos os coautores tenham visto e aprovado a versão final do trabalho e concordem em sua apresentação para publicação.

8. Trabalhos que possam envolver questões éticas específicas regidas por comitês institucionais apropriados devem apresentam o parecer produzido pelos mesmos.

9. Todos os autores devem divulgar em seu manuscrito qualquer conflito de interesse, seja financeiro ou outro relevante que possa ser entendido como uma influência nos resultados de interpretação do manuscrito. Todas as fontes de suporte financeiro ao projeto devem ser divulgadas. Exemplos de possíveis conflitos de interesses que deveriam ser divulgados podem incluir vínculo empregatício, consultoria, propriedade de ações, honorários, depoimentos pagos de especialistas, aplicações / registros de patente, bolsas ou outros financiamentos. Possíveis conflitos de interesses devem ser divulgados o mais cedo possível.

10. Quando o autor descobre um erro significante ou uma imprecisão no seu trabalho já publicado, é o dever do autor notificar imediatamente o editor do periódico, e cooperar com o mesmo para retratar ou corrigir o trabalho. Se o editor descobrir por terceiros que um trabalho publicado contém erros significativos, é obrigação do autor imediatamente retratar ou corrigir o trabalho, ou providenciar evidência para o editor sobre a exatidão do texto original.

11. O editor de um periódico de revisão por pares é responsável pela decisão de quais artigos apresentados ao periódico serão publicadas. A validação do trabalho em questão e a sua importância para pesquisadores e leitores deve sempre ser o que impulsiona tais decisões. O editor pode ser guiado pelas políticas do comitê editorial do periódico e limitado pelos requisitos legais vigentes em matéria de difamação, violação de direitos autorais e plágio.

12. Um editor deve avaliar manuscritos por seu conteúdo intelectual sem distinção de sua raça, gênero, orientação sexual, crenças religiosas, origens étnicas, cidadania, ou filosofia política dos autores.

13. O editor ou qualquer outra pessoa da equipe editorial não devem divulgar quaisquer informações sobre um manuscrito apresentado, a não ser para o correspondente autor, revisores, colaboradores potenciais e outros conselheiros editoriais, conforme o caso.

14. A divulgação de materiais não publicados em um manuscrito submetido não deve ser utilizada pelo editor em sua própria pesquisa sem a autorização expressa por escrito do autor. Informações privilegiadas ou ideias obtidas por revisões de pares devem ser mantidas confidenciais e não utilizadas para proveito pessoal. Os editores devem recusar-se a avaliar manuscritos com os quais eles tenham conflitos de interesse, sendo estes resultantes de concorrência, colaboração, ou outros relacionamentos ou ligações com qualquer um dos autores, empresas, ou instituições ligadas aos trabalhos. Os editores devem exigir que todos os contribuintes divulguem interesses conflitantes relevantes e que publiquem correções se os interesses conflitantes forem revelados após a publicação. Se necessário, devem ser tomadas outras medidas adequadas, tais como a publicação de uma retratação.

15. O editor deve tomar medidas de responsabilidade razoáveis, quando reclamações a respeito de conduta ética forem apresentadas com relação a um manuscrito ou trabalho publicado, em conjunto com a editora (ou sociedade). Tais medidas geralmente incluirão contatar o autor do manuscrito ou trabalho passando-lhe as devidas considerações com relação às reclamações feitas, mas também poderão incluir futuras comunicações com as instituições e corpo de pesquisa relevantes, e se as reclamações forem comprovadas, a publicação de uma correção, retratação, nota de interesse, ou outra nota, caso seja relevante. Todo ato relatado sobre uma conduta antiética nas publicações deverá ser analisado, ainda que este relato ocorra muito tempo após a publicação.

16. A revisão por pares auxilia o editor ao tomar as decisões editoriais, e o editor, através da comunicação com o autor, pode trazer melhorias para o próprio trabalho. A revisão por pares é um componente essencial da comunicação acadêmica formal.

17. Qualquer avaliador selecionado que se sente desqualificado para revisar a pesquisa relatada em um manuscrito, ou que tem conhecimento de que sua revisão rápida será impossível, deverá notificar ao editor e pedir que seja retirado do processo de revisão.

18. Qualquer manuscrito recebido para revisão deve ser tratado como documento confidencial. Os manuscritos não devem ser mostrados ou discutidos com outros a não ser que possuam autorização do editor.

19. Revisões devem ser conduzidas objetivamente, a partir de pontos de vista claros e sustentados cientificamente.

20. Revisores devem identificar publicações de trabalhos relevantes que não tenham sido citadas pelos autores. Qualquer afirmação de que uma observação, derivação, ou argumento tenha sido relatado anteriormente deve ser acompanhada pela citação relevante. O revisor deve também chamar a atenção do editor sobre qualquer similaridade substancial ou sobreposição entre o manuscrito em avaliação e qualquer outro trabalho publicado do qual ele tenha conhecimento pessoal.

21. Materiais não publicados e divulgados em um manuscrito submetido não devem ser usados na pesquisa pessoal de um revisor sem o consentimento expresso de forma escrita pelo autor. Informações privilegiadas ou ideias obtidas através de revisões por pares devem ser mantidas em confidencialidade e não devem ser usadas para vantagem pessoal. Revisores não devem considerar manuscritos dos quais tenham conflitos de interesses, seja resultado de competitividade, colaboração, ou outra relação ou vínculo com qualquer outro autor, companhias, ou instituições que tenha conexão com o trabalho.

22. A Escritas do Tempo possui backup eletrônico e preservação do acesso ao conteúdo da revista, no caso deste periódico não ser mais publicado.

On behalf of the authors

The authors must clearly present the used sources and the data organization made from those.
The authors must retain the data collected by them in the writing of their texts after the publication since, in the future, the authors may be requested by the Journal’s editorial team to make some editorial review and even to make these data public for the sake of clarification.
The authors must certify they wrote completely original works and if they have used other people’s works and/or words, it is mandatory they present quotations/references. Plagiarism can be characterized in many ways from copying fragments of other texts to the use of research findings. Anyway, in all its forms plagiarism is an unethical publication behavior, therefore unacceptable.
The submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal, simultaneously, is unethical behavior.
The authors must quote publications that were influential in defining their work’s nature. Information got without an authorization form, such as conversations, letters, or third-party discussions, must not be used or reported without the source’s explicit written permission.
The Journal publishes images as long as the authors provide legal authorization for the publication of those images, which are protected by the current copyright legislation in the country.
Authorship must be limited to those who made significant contributions to the conception, structuring, execution, or interpretation of the study. All those who made a significant contribution should be listed as co-authors. The author must certify that all the suitable co-authors and not the misplaced co-authors are included in the paper, and that all the coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agree to submit it for publication.
Papers that may concern specific ethical issues guided by appropriate institutional committees must present the statement produced by these committees.
All authors must disclose any conflict of interest in their manuscript, whether financial or other relevant conflict that can be perceived as an influence in the manuscript interpretation results. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed. Examples of conflicts of interest that should be disclosed are: employment relationships, consulting, stock ownership, fees, paid expert testimonials, patent applications/registrations, scholarships or other funding. All of these possible conflicts of interest must be disclosed as soon as possible.
When the author finds out a significant mistake or inaccuracy in his’s/her’s/their’s already published paper, it is the author’s duty to immediately notify the journal’s editor and cooperate with him/her in order to retract or correct the work. If the editor finds out from others that a published paper contains significant mistakes in it, it is the author’s duty to immediately retract or correct the work or provide evidence about the original text’s accuracy to the editor.
A peer review journal’s editor is responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal are going to be published. The paper’s validation and its importance for researchers and readers should always be what drives such decisions. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and restricted by the current legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright violation, and plagiarism.
An editor must evaluate a manuscript for their intellectual content without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origins, citizenship, or political philosophy.
The editor or any other person on the editorial board must not disclose any information about the presented manuscript, other than to the corresponding author, reviewer, potential collaborators, and other editorial counselors, as the case may be.
The editor must not use the disclosure of unpublished material in a submitted manuscript in his/her own research without the author’s written authorization. Inside information or ideas obtained through peer reviewing must be maintained confidential and not used for personal matters. The editors must refuse to evaluate manuscripts with which they have conflicts of interest whether resulting from competition, collaboration, or other relationships or connections to any of the authors, companies, or institutions related to the papers. The editors must demand that all contributors disclose relevant conflicting interests and publish corrections if conflicting interests are exposed after the publication. If required, other appropriate actions should be taken, such as publishing a retraction.
The editor, with the publisher (and society) must take reasonable liability measures when someone presents complaints regarding the ethical conduct of a manuscript or published paper. Such measures often include contact the manuscript or the paper’s author giving him/her/them the considerations regarding the claims made about the text, but they may also include future communications with the relevant institutions and body of research. If the complaints are confirmed it may include a publication of a correction, retraction, note of interest, or other if relevant. Every reported act of unethical conduct in the publications must be analyzed even if this report happens long after the publication date.
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and the editor can bring improvements to the work itself through communication with the author. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication.
Any selected reviewer that feels unqualified to review the allotted research in a manuscript or is aware their fast review will be impossible should notify the editor and ask to be removed from the review process.
All manuscripts received for review must be treated as a confidential document. Manuscripts must not be shown or discussed with others unless they have permission from the editor.
Reviews must be conduct objectively from clear, scientifically supported points of view.
Reviewers must identify relevant papers’ publications that have not been quoted by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation or reasoning has been previously reported must be followed by quotation. The reviewer must also bring to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlapping between the evaluated manuscript and any other published work of which the reviewer has personal knowledge.
A reviewer must not use unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript for his/her own personal research without the author’s written authorization. Inside information or ideas obtained through peer reviewing must be maintained confidential and not used for personal matters. Reviewers must refuse to evaluate manuscripts with which they have conflicts of interest whether resulting from competition, collaboration, or other relationships or connections to any of the authors, companies, or institutions related to the papers.
The journal Escritas do Tempo has electronic backup and preservation of access to its content in case it is no longer published.

___

Ethical Values

On behalf of the authors

The authors must clearly present the used sources and the data organization made from those.
The authors must retain the data collected by them in the writing of their texts after the publication since, in the future, the authors may be requested by the Journal’s editorial team to make some editorial review and even to make these data public for the sake of clarification.
The authors must certify they wrote completely original works and if they have used other people’s works and/or words, it is mandatory they present quotations/references. Plagiarism can be characterized in many ways from copying fragments of other texts to the use of research findings. Anyway, in all its forms plagiarism is an unethical publication behavior, therefore unacceptable.
The submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal, simultaneously, is unethical behavior.
The authors must quote publications that were influential in defining their work’s nature. Information got without an authorization form, such as conversations, letters, or third-party discussions, must not be used or reported without the source’s explicit written permission.
The Journal publishes images as long as the authors provide legal authorization for the publication of those images, which are protected by the current copyright legislation in the country.
Authorship must be limited to those who made significant contributions to the conception, structuring, execution, or interpretation of the study. All those who made a significant contribution should be listed as co-authors. The author must certify that all the suitable co-authors and not the misplaced co-authors are included in the paper, and that all the coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agree to submit it for publication.
Papers that may concern specific ethical issues guided by appropriate institutional committees must present the statement produced by these committees.
All authors must disclose any conflict of interest in their manuscript, whether financial or other relevant conflict that can be perceived as an influence in the manuscript interpretation results. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed. Examples of conflicts of interest that should be disclosed are: employment relationships, consulting, stock ownership, fees, paid expert testimonials, patent applications/registrations, scholarships or other funding. All of these possible conflicts of interest must be disclosed as soon as possible.
When the author finds out a significant mistake or inaccuracy in his’s/her’s/their’s already published paper, it is the author’s duty to immediately notify the journal’s editor and cooperate with him/her in order to retract or correct the work. If the editor finds out from others that a published paper contains significant mistakes in it, it is the author’s duty to immediately retract or correct the work or provide evidence about the original text’s accuracy to the editor.
A peer review journal’s editor is responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal are going to be published. The paper’s validation and its importance for researchers and readers should always be what drives such decisions. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and restricted by the current legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright violation, and plagiarism.
An editor must evaluate a manuscript for their intellectual content without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origins, citizenship, or political philosophy.
The editor or any other person on the editorial board must not disclose any information about the presented manuscript, other than to the corresponding author, reviewer, potential collaborators, and other editorial counselors, as the case may be.
The editor must not use the disclosure of unpublished material in a submitted manuscript in his/her own research without the author’s written authorization. Inside information or ideas obtained through peer reviewing must be maintained confidential and not used for personal matters. The editors must refuse to evaluate manuscripts with which they have conflicts of interest whether resulting from competition, collaboration, or other relationships or connections to any of the authors, companies, or institutions related to the papers. The editors must demand that all contributors disclose relevant conflicting interests and publish corrections if conflicting interests are exposed after the publication. If required, other appropriate actions should be taken, such as publishing a retraction.
The editor, with the publisher (and society) must take reasonable liability measures when someone presents complaints regarding the ethical conduct of a manuscript or published paper. Such measures often include contact the manuscript or the paper’s author giving him/her/them the considerations regarding the claims made about the text, but they may also include future communications with the relevant institutions and body of research. If the complaints are confirmed it may include a publication of a correction, retraction, note of interest, or other if relevant. Every reported act of unethical conduct in the publications must be analyzed even if this report happens long after the publication date.
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and the editor can bring improvements to the work itself through communication with the author. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication.
Any selected reviewer that feels unqualified to review the allotted research in a manuscript or is aware their fast review will be impossible should notify the editor and ask to be removed from the review process.
All manuscripts received for review must be treated as a confidential document. Manuscripts must not be shown or discussed with others unless they have permission from the editor.
Reviews must be conduct objectively from clear, scientifically supported points of view.
Reviewers must identify relevant papers’ publications that have not been quoted by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation or reasoning has been previously reported must be followed by quotation. The reviewer must also bring to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlapping between the evaluated manuscript and any other published work of which the reviewer has personal knowledge.
A reviewer must not use unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript for his/her own personal research without the author’s written authorization. Inside information or ideas obtained through peer reviewing must be maintained confidential and not used for personal matters. Reviewers must refuse to evaluate manuscripts with which they have conflicts of interest whether resulting from competition, collaboration, or other relationships or connections to any of the authors, companies, or institutions related to the papers.
The journal Escritas do Tempo has electronic backup and preservation of access to its content in case it is no longer published.

Princípios Éticos / Ethical Values

Idioma

Informações