Editorial Policies

1. OPEN SCIENCE POLICY

This journal adheres to the Principles of the SciELO Program as an Open Science framework and a global public good, agreeing with the Declaration in Support of Open Science with the IDEIA Principles – Impact, Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility – and the UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science.
The Open Science practices adopted by the journal are:

1.1. Open Access Statement: Immediate Free Access to Content

The journal provides immediate open access to its content, following the principle that making scientific knowledge freely available to the public fosters greater global democratization of knowledge. It adheres to the DOAJ definition of open access: Open Access is the condition "where the copyright holder of a scholarly work grants usage rights to others using an open license (Creative Commons or equivalent). This allows for immediate free access to the work and permits any user to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose". (https://doaj.org/apply/guide/).

The journal adopts the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY) for both its website content and published articles, with copyright retained by the authors.

1.2. Preprints, Postprints, and Self-Archiving

To promote broader dissemination of knowledge and expedite the process of sharing research findings, the journal authorizes and encourages the deposit of submitted articles in the following preprint servers:

Preprints are articles that have not yet undergone peer review within the editorial process of a scientific journal or have been peer-reviewed but not yet published. These can be deposited in certified servers without compromising the originality of the research. In such cases, authors should be aware that:

a) It is essential to indicate, at the time of submission, in the Form 1 - Authors data and open science compliance, that the article has been deposited in one of the above servers and to provide the link with the preprint DOI.

b) Depositing the article as a preprint in one of the servers above makes the work publicly available and may allow for potential author identification. Therefore, when depositing the article as a preprint, the author acknowledges that reviewers may occasionally be aware of the authorship of the reviewed work, shifting the peer review process from double-blind (anonymity of both the author and reviewers) to single-blind peer review (peer review with simple anonymity), in which only the anonymity of one of the parties in the process – the reviewers – is guaranteed.

c) If the article is deposited in a preprint repository and rejected by this journal during the review process, it may subsequently be submitted only to journals that also accept articles previously deposited as preprints.

The journal authorizes, in addition to the deposit of submitted articles as preprints, the self-archiving of the final published version of the article (postprint) in any open access server or repository, such as Academia.edu and ResearchGate, as well as on social networks and institutional or personal websites.

1.3. Open Research Data

To promote data accessibility, transparency, and the reproducibility of research, the journal adopts parameters for the sharing of research data in accordance with the Guide to promoting the opening, transparency and reproducibility of research published by SciELO journals.

Articles based on empirical data collected by the authors (e.g., sets of decisions from a specific court; interviews conducted with participants), in addition to a literature review, must deposit the research data files in SciELO Data (an official data repository), within the journal’s dataverse, observing the following:

a) The deposit of research data in the repository must strictly follow the guidelines outlined in the SciELO Data Research Data Preparation Guidelines.

b) After the research data has been deposited in the journal's dataverse on SciELO Data, the article must include in the references list at the end, in addition to the cited bibliography, a full reference to the research data used, containing the following elements: SURNAME, First Name. Title of the dataset [dataset]. Day, month, and year. SciELO Data. DOI: DOI link.

Example: BENVINDO, Juliano Zaiden et al. Research Data – The Study of Comparative Constitutional Law in Brazil: Mapping Initiatives and Prospects for Development [dataset]. February 21, 2024. SciELO Data. DOI: https://doi.org/10.48331/scielodata.ITBXPQ).

c) If the article uses more than one dataset or subset, each dataset must be cited independently in the references list.

d) The article must include a section titled “Data Availability” at the end, indicating the access link to the dataset available in the SciELO Data repository. In cases where data-sharing restrictions exist for ethical or legal reasons, these must be reported at the time of article submission.

1.4. Possibility of Open Peer Review and Publication of Review Reports

The author has the option to authorize the editors to facilitate direct interaction with the article’s reviewers, waiving the anonymous nature of the review, provided that the reviewers also agree. In this case, the open peer review model is adopted. This option must be indicated by the author at the time of article submission in the Form 1 - Authors data and open science compliance, available for download at: https://bibliotecavirtual.unl.edu.ar/publicaciones/index.php/Redoeda/libraryFiles/downloadPublic/38.
If this model is adopted, authors agree that the journal may offer reviewers the possibility of publishing their review reports in the same issue in which the article is published.

1.5. Publication of the Names of Responsible Editors

Starting in 2024, the names of the editors responsible for overseeing the article’s review process will be indicated at the end of the article.

2. PUBLISHING ETHICS AND BEST PRACTICES POLICY

To ensure an ethical and scientifically integral process of editing, reviewing, and publishing articles, the journal uses the following documents as guidelines for its editors, Editorial Board members, reviewers, and authors:

Below is a summary of the main duties addressed to editors, authors, and reviewers, which do not exclude others mentioned in the documents above, which should be considered as an integral part of the journal’s Publishing Ethics and Best Practices Policy:

2.1. Main Duties of Editors

  • Responsibilities of the Editor-in-Chief: The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for implementing the editorial policy, supervising the editorial process, and managing the journal's interactions with authors, reviewers, readers, indexers, research funding agencies, the scientific community, and the general public. Additionally, they must ensure the transparency and quality of the editorial process.
  • Impartiality and Respect: The review process for articles submitted to the journal must be conducted by editors with complete impartiality, free from biases related to race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, ethnicity, nationality, or other personal characteristics of the authors.
  • Confidentiality: Information regarding articles submitted to the journal must be kept confidential by editors and other editorial staff, sharing such information only with reviewers and Editorial Board members when necessary.
  • Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Editors are prohibited from using unpublished materials disclosed in submitted articles for their own research without the explicit written consent of the authors. Additionally, editors should refrain from evaluating articles in which there are conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with authors, companies, or institutions associated with the work.
  • Support and Cooperation in Investigations: In cases of ethical complaints about a submitted or published article, editors must take the necessary and appropriate measures to investigate possible ethical infractions.
  • Publication Decision: The editor is responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal will be published, following the guidelines defined by the Editorial Board. These guidelines must comply with applicable laws regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor may consult the Editorial Board and reviewers to assist in the decision-making process.

2.2. Main Duties of Authors

  • Objective, Accurate, and Referenced Analysis: Authors of original research must present an accurate description of the work conducted, accompanied by an objective analysis of its significance. The data provided should be accurate and include sufficient details and references to allow others to replicate the study. False or intentionally misleading statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
  • Multiple Submissions to Other Journals: Authors must not submit articles describing the same research to more than one journal simultaneously. Publishing the same article in multiple journals without notifying and obtaining the consent of the editors is considered unethical and unacceptable.
  • Originality, Anti-Plagiarism, and Source Referencing: Authors must ensure that their articles are entirely original. If they use the work or words of others, these must be properly cited, with the use of quotation marks and the indication of the source. Plagiarism, defined as the reproduction of ideas and texts of others without proper attribution, is unethical and unacceptable. The work of other authors must always be acknowledged through proper citations. Publications that influenced the study must be cited. Privately obtained information, such as in conversations, correspondence, or discussions, should not be used or disclosed without written permission from the source. Information obtained through confidential services, such as manuscript review or grant application evaluations, should not be used without the express authorization of the author.
  • Authenticity of Sources and References: Authors must ensure that all references cited in the article genuinely exist and were personally consulted during the research process. The use of generative artificial intelligence software for the inclusion of sources and references in the article is strictly prohibited.
  • Authorship and Co-authorship: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, development, execution, or interpretation of the study. All those who contributed substantially should be listed as co-authors. Individuals who contributed to specific parts of the research should be acknowledged as collaborators. The principal author must ensure that all co-authors are properly included, have approved the final version of the submitted article, and agree with its submission. For co-authored articles, a form, available in the Guidelines for Authors, adopting the CRediT Taxonomy and specifying 14 potential roles performed by co-authors in the research, must be completed and submitted along with the article. In the form, it will be necessary to specify which of these 14 functions were performed by each of the co-authors. It is expressly prohibited to submit co-authored articles without the explicit consent of the listed co-authors, as well as to request the inclusion of new authors after article approval, which, if done, will result in the revocation of the publication decision.
  • Self-Plagiarism: Articles containing excerpts from works already published by the author in another venue, even in a different language, must indicate the previously published excerpts with quotation marks and provide the full reference and specific page where they appear.
  • Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Authors must disclose any financial or other conflicts of interest that could influence the results or interpretation of their article. All sources of financial support should be disclosed. Articles resulting from commissioned research funded by companies or clients of the author must explicitly state the research source and funding.
  • Error Correction: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, they must immediately inform the journal editor and cooperate to correct the issue.
  • Ethics Committees for Human or Animal Research: Articles involving research with human or animal subjects must adhere to the ethical standards required by the Brazilian National Research Ethics Commission/National Health Council/Ministry of Health (CONEP/CNS/MS) and be approved by an Ethics Committee. Research involving human subjects must comply with the relevant resolutions of the Brazilian National Health Council (CNS) or the equivalent body in the country of origin. In such cases, authors must submit a statement of Ethics Committee approval from the responsible institution at the time of submission.
  • International Standards for Authors: Authors must follow and respect the standards set out in the document: Responsible research publication: international standards for authors (WAGER, E.; KLEINERT, S. Responsible research publication: international standards for authors. A position statement developed at the 2nd World Conference on Research Integrity, Singapore, July 22-24, 2010. Chapter 50. In: MAYER T. ; STENECK, N. (eds.) Promoting Research Integrity in a Global Environment. Singapore : Imperial College Press/World Scientific Publishing, 2011. p. 309-316).

2.3. Main Duties of Reviewers

  • Assistance in Editorial Decisions: The analysis of articles by reviewers is essential for assisting the editor in making publication decisions and, through a detailed analysis of the authors' work, can contribute to improving the article.
  • Specificity of Analysis: The review should be thorough, with reviewers conducting a detailed examination of the article and highlighting, in numbered points, specific aspects that need correction, revision, or which constitute problematic issues leading to the rejection of the article.
  • Timeliness: If a reviewer feels unqualified to review an article or knows they will be unable to do so within the required time frame, they must inform the editor promptly.
  • Confidentiality: Articles received for review must be treated as confidential documents and not shared or discussed with third parties.
  • Objectivity Criteria: Reviews must be conducted impartially and objectively. Reviewers must present their observations clearly, supported by solid arguments. The reviewer should use the criteria indicated in the review form.
  • Recognition of Sources: It is the reviewer's duty to identify relevant references not cited by the authors and to inform the editor of any significant similarities or overlaps between the article and other published works of which they are aware.
  • Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained during the review process must remain confidential and must not be used for personal benefit. Reviewers should refrain from evaluating articles with which they have conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the article.
  • International Standards for Reviewers: Reviewers must follow and respect the standards set out in the document: Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers (Committee on Publication Ethics – COPE Council. COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. Version 2 September 2017. https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.9)

3. CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY

Public trust in the peer review process and the credibility of published articles partially depend on how conflicts of interest are managed during the writing, peer review, and editorial decision-making processes. The journal adopts the following guidelines on this matter:

3.1. Authors submitting an article to the journal are required to declare whether or not conflicts of interest exist.

3.2. Conflicts of interest may arise when authors, reviewers, or editors have interests that, whether apparent or not, could influence the writing or evaluation of articles. The conflict of interest may be of a personal, commercial, political, academic, or financial nature.

3.3. When authors submit an article, they are responsible for acknowledging and disclosing any financial or other conflicts that could have influenced their work.

3.4. Authors must disclose in the article all financial support for the work and any other financial or personal connections related to the research. Contributions from individuals acknowledged for their assistance in the research must be described, and their consent for publication must be documented.

3.5. Articles will not be rejected solely because of the existence of a conflict of interest, but a statement must be made indicating the presence or absence of conflicts of interest, transparently and including all relevant information about the conflict.

3.6. Reviewers must also disclose to editors any conflicts of interest that could affect their opinions about the article and should declare themselves unqualified to review specific manuscripts if they believe this is appropriate. As with authors, if reviewers do not disclose potential conflicts, it will be assumed that no conflicts exist.

3.7. If a conflict of interest is identified on the part of a reviewer, the Editorial Board will forward the article to another ad hoc reviewer.

3.8. If authors are uncertain about what might constitute a potential conflict of interest, they should contact the Editor-in-Chief of the journal.

3.9. For cases where editors or other staff members frequently publish in the journal, no special or preferential treatment will be granted. All articles submitted by them will be evaluated through the double-blind peer review process.

4. MISCONDUCT, ERRATA, AND RETRACTION POLICY

4.1. Process for the Verification of Misconduct and Violations

4.1.1. Suspicions of misconduct or violations of the journal's Editorial Policies or Author Guidelines may be reported to the journal's email: revistaredoeda@gmail.com.

4.1.2. If a suspicion of misconduct or violation of the journal's Editorial Policies is found, either by the editors or through submitted reports, the editors will conduct a thorough and detailed examination of the situation, gathering as much documentary evidence as possible regarding the potential violation.

4.1.3. Once evidence of a possible violtaion is found, the editors will notify the parties involved via email of the identified irregularity and allow a 15-day period for response, which may be reduced to 5 days for serious violations.

4.1.4. After receiving the responses from the accused parties, the editors will analyze the arguments and make a decision regarding the occurrence of misconduct or violation, consulting the Editorial Board members for opinions if necessary, to assist in the decision-making process.

4.1.5. If misconduct or violation is confirmed, the editors may apply the following sanctions, separately or cumulatively, depending on the severity of the facts:

a) A written warning, in private;
b) Publication of an erratum or explanatory note;
c) Rejection of the article if it has not yet been published;
d) Formal retraction of the article, partially or entirely, as outlined below;
e) Removal of the reviewer or editor;
f) Temporary or permanent ban on the author from submitting new articles to the journal;
g) Written communication to the author's, reviewer's, or editor's home institution.

4.1.6. If the process originated from a report, the editors will inform the reporter of the conclusion of the process and the grounds for the decision.

4.2. Process for the Publication of Errata and Article Retraction

4.2.1. In cases where an erratum or article retraction needs to be published, the journal will follow the procedures outlined in the Guide for the registration, tagging, and publication of Errata by SciELO, the Guide for the registration, tagging, and publication of retractions by SciELO, and the COPE Retraction Guidelines.

4.2.2. Errata will be published when authors, editors, reviewers, or readers identify the need for corrections in documents published by the journal due to errors or failures that do not constitute misconduct.

4.2.3. When serious problems or misconduct are identified in already published articles, the journal may proceed with: (i) partial retraction: registration and disclosure of the issue in an excerpt of the publication; (ii) total retraction: cancellation of the entire content of the publication.

4.2.4. Retraction will be carried out by publishing a "Retraction Notice" explaining the reasons for the retraction in the most recent issue of the journal. This notice will be added to the original article file in the issue where it was published. The article will not be removed from the issue in which it was published but will include the "Retraction Notice" and: (i) in the case of partial retraction: a black mark with a retraction notice on the affected figure, table, paragraph, or section; (ii) in the case of total retraction: a watermark reading "RETRACTED ARTICLE" on all pages of the document.

4.2.5. If the reason for retraction involves misconduct or a violation of the journal's Editorial Policies, it will be preceded by the "4.1. Process for the Verification of Misconduct and Violations" described above.

5. PLAGIARISM POLICY AND SIMILARITY CHECK SOFTWARE

The journal uses Turnitin’s iThenticate software to check for plagiarism and similarities between the submitted article and previous publications. Plagiarism checks are conducted during the desk review stage, after the article’s compliance with the Author Guidelines has been verified and before the article is submitted for peer review. If plagiarism is detected in the article, the procedure described in the "4.1. Process for the Verification of Misconduct and Violations" section above will be followed, potentially culminating in the total retraction of the article as outlined in "4.2. Process for the Publication of Errata and Article Retraction". The steps of the process adhere to the COPE flowchart Plagiarism in a submitted manuscript.

6. INCLUSION AND DIVERSITY POLICY

6.1. Gender Equity in the Editorial Board

In order to promote gender diversity, the journal restructured its Editorial Board in 2024 to achieve gender parity among its members, with 7 women (50%) and 7 men (50%).

6.2. Consideration of Gender Diversity in Journal Issues Composition

To promote gender diversity, when deciding which articles will be included in each issue of the journal, editors take into account the presence of female authors in the articles. Thus, within the set of articles already approved for publication, when composing the issues and establishing priorities for publication order, editors may prioritize articles that include women among the co-authors, even if they were submitted and approved after other articles that only have male co-authors. The goal is to avoid issues with a significant imbalance between male and female authorship.

6.3. Guidelines on Sex and Gender Equity in Empirical Research

For empirical research, the journal recommends adherence to the Sex and Gender Equity in Research – SAGER Guidelines. The SAGER Guidelines comprise a set of recommendations that guide the reporting of information on sex and gender in study design, data analysis, and the reporting and interpretation of findings.

7. LICENSE AND COPYRIGHT POLICY

The journal adopts the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License for both its website content and published articles.

Authors who publish in this Journal agree to the following terms:

7.1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication with the article simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons - Attribution 4.0 Internationalwhich allows sharing the work with recognition of the authors and its initial publication in this Journal.

7.2. Authors are able to take on additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the paper published in this Journal (eg.: publishing in institutional repository or as a book), with a recognition of its initial publication in this Journal.

7.3. Authors are allowed and encouraged to publish and distribute their work online on personal blogs, institutional repositories, academic social networks, and personal social media platforms, provided that a full citation to the journal's version of the work is included. This may be done at any stage before or during the editorial process, as it can lead to productive exchanges and increase the impact and citation of the published work (see the Effect of Open Access).

7.4. Authors have the right to:

a) Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.

b) Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.

c) The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as the author follow the license terms.

7.5. Under the following terms:

a) Attribution — Authors must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. Authors may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses the authors or their use.

b) No additional restrictions — Authors may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.

7.6. Notices:

a) Authors do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where their use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .

b) No warranties are given. The license may not give the authors all of the permissions necessary for their intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how the authors use the material.

8. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE TOOLS POLICY

8.1. The use of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools by authors, such as ChatGPT and other tools based on large language models (LLMs), is authorized solely and exclusively as a basic support tool for authors for the purpose of refining or correcting spelling and grammar, editing, and formatting the text. In such cases, the author is fully responsible for the accuracy and precision of any information provided by the tool, as well as for any potential violations of the journal's Editorial Policies.

8.2. Authors are strictly prohibited from using generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools to:

a) Create, alter, or manipulate original research data and results;
b) Attribute authorship credit to generative artificial intelligence (GenAI);
c) Include sources and references in the article.

8.3. Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools cannot be listed as coauthors of an article, as they cannot be held accountable for the submitted article, in accordance with COPE’s position statement on Authorship and AI tools.

8.4. The use of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools by authors, in cases permitted by this policy, must be disclosed in a footnote of the article, detailing which tool was used and how it was utilized.

9. PRIVACY POLICY

All data provided by authors to this journal will be used exclusively for the services provided by this publication and will not be made available for other purposes or to third parties.