Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Análise Social observes the highest ethical standards with regard to authorship, data integrity, ethical conduct of research, disclosure of conflicts of interest, and other relevant aspects of academic publishing. All publication decisions are the joint responsibility of the Board and Editors, with the agreement of all parties involved in the act of publication, including authors and reviewers.

 

The journal follows the standards and best practices recognised in the field of social sciences and humanities, informed by the principles of publication ethics established by COPE (available at http://publicationethics.org/).

Responsibilities of the Director and Editorial Board of Análise Social

 The Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board of Análise Social are responsible for:

  • deciding which articles submitted to the journal should, after the peer review process, be published. This decision is guided by the journal's rules (see Submission Rules) and the legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright violations and plagiarism;
  • provide guidance to guest-editors, authors and reviewers on everything that is expected of them, as well as clarifying the peer review process;
  • orientate new members of the Editorial Board on their duties and keep current members up to date on new policies and developments;
  • guide new members of the Advisory Board on their duties and keep current members up to date on new policies and developments;
  • evaluate articles solely on the basis of their academic and intellectual merit, regardless of factors such as: race, age, gender, sexual orientation, disability, ethnic origin, religious belief, nationality, political orientation, institutional affiliation or social class of the authors;
  • ensure that the scientific arbitration process for articles is anonymous (double-blind peer review), fair and impartial and that all information relating to them remains confidential. Also ensure that the identity of authors and evaluators is protected;
  • guarantee an appropriate selection of reviewers, suitable for the theoretical-methodological and/or thematic evaluation of the articles;
  • develop and maintain a database of relevant reviewers, which is updated according to their performance;
  • ensure that unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted article are not used in research carried out by member(s) of the Editorial Board without the author's express written consent;
  • respond by taking reasonable measures in the event of complaints made about a submitted or published article. In the event of suspected misconduct, follow the COPE flowcharts, available at http://publicationethics.org/files/Full%20set%20of%20flowcharts.pdf;
  • publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies whenever necessary;
  • must ensure absolute impartiality and transparency, following ethical standards and best practices.

Responsibilities of guest editors

The guest editors invited to edit a special issue or thematic section are responsible for:

  • defining the subject in focus and the role of each article in the thematic issues;
  • providing clear guidelines to the authors on the theme/scope of their contributions and on the overall design of the issue;
  • ensure, in collaboration with the Editorial Board, that suitable reviewers are chosen for all articles (whether commissioned or submitted as part of a call for papers);
  • ensure a good flow of communication between all parties (Editorial Board, authors and reviewers);
  • establish a timetable for the submission of articles, their scientific arbitration, revision and final submission, together with the Editorial Board, ensuring that all deadlines are met;
  • writing the issue's introduction in accordance with the journal's standards.

 

Authors’ responsibilities

 Authors of papers resulting from original research must report on the work carried out in a rigorous manner that objectively represents the reality investigated. Fraudulent or intentionally inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable;

  • Authors must respect ethical rules of authorship and fairness towards all collaborators in the work. All those who participated with significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. If other people have participated in certain substantial aspects of the research project, they should be recognised or listed as collaborators;
  • The author responsible for correspondence with the journal must ensure that all appropriate co-authors are included in the list of authors of the article and that there is consensus among all co-authors in approving the final version of the article and its submission for publication;
  • Authors must disclose financial or other conflicts of interest that could influence the results or interpretation of their article(s). All sources of financial support must be disclosed;
  • When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's obligation to immediately notify the journal's Editorial Board and co-operate with them to correct or withdraw the article from publication;
  • Authors should not submit the same article simultaneously to more than one publication. This practice is contrary to publication ethics and is unacceptable;
  • Authors must ensure that their work is original and that any work or words from other authors, collaborators or sources have been duly accredited and referenced;
  • Authors who submit their works for publication as original articles confirm that they are their own contributions and have not been copied or plagiarised from other works, in whole or in part, without the respective source being clearly cited;
  • Plagiarism constitutes unethical practice in publishing in all its forms and is unacceptable.

 Peer reviewers' responsibilities

 Scientific peer review supports the decisions of the Director and the Editorial Board of Análise Social;

  • Any reviewer asked for an opinion who does not feel qualified to analyse the research described in the article or knows that their review will not be able to meet the deadline must notify Análise Social immediately;
  • All articles received in the context of scientific peer review must be treated as confidential documents;
  • Reviewers should refuse to review a manuscript if they have any conflict of interest resulting from professional collaborative relationships, as well as family or intimate relationships with any of the authors of the manuscript. Confidentiality and anonymity are guaranteed throughout the review process.
  • Any privileged information or ideas obtained through scientific peer review must be kept confidential and may not be used for personal gain;
  • The peer reviewers must inform the Board of Análise Social if they are aware of any violation of copyright and/or plagiarism on the part of the author;
  • Opinions must be structured objectively and comments must be clearly formulated and based on supporting arguments, so that authors can use them to improve their article;
  • The evaluators assess the articles on the basis of their content and regardless of factors such as: race, age, gender, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, disability, religious belief, nationality, political orientation or social class of the authors;
  • Reviewers should not consider articles in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions related to the articles.

Responsibilities of the Editor

 As the publishing institution of Análise Social, the Institute of Social Sciences of the University of Lisbon (ICS-ULisboa):

  •  provides practical support to the Director and the Editorial Board so that they can follow the code of conduct established for COPE scientific journals;
  • guarantees the autonomy of editorial decisions;
  • protects intellectual property and copyright;
  • ensures that good practices are maintained, taking into account the standards defined above.