Evaluation Policy
ARTICLE, EXPERIENCE REPORT
The evaluation process is carried out in two phases:
1) The first phase is conducted by the Editorial Team, which assesses whether the text meets the general criteria of the journal and submission guidelines. To ensure good research practices, the manuscript will also be evaluated for plagiarism, duplicate submissions, and potential research fraud. If the submission does not meet these requirements, the author will be notified, and the manuscript will be archived.
2) Manuscripts considered suitable in the first phase will undergo a double-blind peer review process. The reviewers, whether members of the Editorial Board or ad hoc invited experts, will be chosen based on their expertise in the relevant field (from the journal's reviewer database or the Lattes platform).
The evaluation criteria for manuscripts include: relevance and appropriateness to the research field; conceptual depth in problem presentation; consistency and rigor in the theoretical-methodological approach and argumentation; engagement with the scholarly literature in the field; originality of the contribution; and textual quality.
Reviewers are responsible for deciding whether to accept, reject, or request revisions for the manuscript. A manuscript will be "Accepted" for publication if it receives two favorable reviews and "Rejected" if it receives two unfavorable reviews. In the case of one favorable and one unfavorable review, the manuscript will be sent to a third reviewer. However, the final decision lies with the Editorial Committee.
In the case of "Revisions Required," the reviewer must indicate if they wish to reassess the revised manuscript. The author will be notified of the decision, provided with the reviewers' comments, informed of the deadline for revisions, and instructed on how to resubmit the manuscript. Once revised and deemed "Accepted" for publication, the manuscript will move to the copyediting and editorial phases.
INTERVIEW, DOCUMENT and REVIEW
The evaluation process for interviews, documents, and reviews is conducted in a single phase by the Editorial Team, which may request feedback from a subject matter expert.
The evaluation criteria include: relevance and appropriateness to the field and originality. For interviews, the express authorization of the interviewee will also be considered.
Authors can monitor the entire review process through their login and password on the journal's platform.