Ethics Policy and Good Practice Statement
REJUR adopts this policy based on the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), particularly the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing (3rd edition, 2018), as well as the guidelines of the Web of Science. Its provisions apply to authors, reviewers, members of the editorial board, guest editors and dossier coordinators.
The journal conducts its activities in accordance with the principles of academic integrity, transparency and responsibility throughout the entire editorial process. All participants must declare any conflicts of interest of a personal, academic, financial, institutional or professional nature.
A conflict of interest is understood as any divergence between an individual’s private interests (competing interests) and their responsibilities toward scientific and editorial activities, such that a reasonable observer could question whether the individual’s behavior or judgment was influenced by those competing interests. This applies to authors, reviewers and editors. A formal declaration of absence of conflicts is also expected.
Editors’ Duties
Editors must decide on the publication of manuscripts based solely on academic merit, scientific relevance and adherence to the journal’s scope, in accordance with the guidelines of the Editorial Board. In performing this function, they must comply with rules regarding copyright, plagiarism and defamation, and ensure fair treatment of authors without discrimination of any kind.
Editors are responsible for preserving the confidentiality of manuscripts and related information, limiting disclosure to what is strictly necessary for editorial evaluation. They must act transparently, safeguard unpublished data and not use submitted content without the authors’ explicit authorization.
Editors must also refuse to evaluate manuscripts (desk review) when there are conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions linked to the manuscripts. In cases of suspected or reported ethical misconduct, editors must take diligent and proportionate measures and cooperate with any investigations.
Reviewers’ Duties
Reviewers must evaluate manuscripts in a confidential, objective and well-founded manner, contributing to the quality of the editorial process. Their reports must support editorial decision-making and provide guidance for improving the work. The analysis must be based on verifiable academic criteria, with precise presentation of arguments and indication, where appropriate, of gaps, inconsistencies or opportunities for improvement, including relevant literature not cited.
Reviewers must preserve the confidentiality of manuscripts and the information contained therein, refraining from sharing or using unpublished data for any purpose. They must promptly inform the editor of any substantial similarities with other works, and declare any impediments, unavailability or conflicts of interest that may compromise impartiality. In such cases, they must decline the review. They are also expected to meet deadlines or inform, in a timely manner, their inability to do so.
Authors’ Duties
Authors must ensure that submitted manuscripts are original, unpublished and written with accuracy. Fabrication or manipulation of data constitutes scientific misconduct, while republication is only permitted in exceptional cases, with authorization from the Editorial Team, supervised by the Editor-in-Chief, and with explicit indication of the prior publication.
Authors must ensure the integrity of authorship and submission. All individuals who have made significant contributions to the conception, execution or writing of the work must be identified as authors, while minor contributions must be appropriately acknowledged. The submitting author must ensure that all co-authors have had access to the final version, approved its content and agreed to the submission.
The inclusion of names without effective contribution or the later addition of co-authors is prohibited. Such information must be described in the “Comments to the Editor” field at submission.
Example of contribution statement
“[Author’s name] and [Co-author’s name] contributed equally to all stages of conception, structuring and writing of this article, and read and approved the final version submitted for publication. [Co-author’s name] contributed to supervision, structuring of the text and writing revision, including content correction and linguistic revision.”
Authors must not submit the same manuscript, or substantially similar versions, to more than one journal simultaneously, nor publish identical or redundant results in different venues. They must properly cite relevant works and obtain explicit authorization for the use of information obtained through confidential means or private communication.
Authors must also disclose, in the “Comments to the Editor” field at submission, any financial or other conflicts of interest that may influence the results or interpretation of the work, and all sources of financial support.
If authors identify a significant error or inaccuracy after publication, they must immediately inform the editorial team and cooperate in correcting or retracting the article. Failure to comply may result in appropriate editorial measures.
Good practices also include ethical duties in research involving human subjects. Submission of such manuscripts must be preceded by approval from a Research Ethics Committee or equivalent bodies, when applicable, in accordance with the Author Guidelines.
Manuscripts accepted with revisions must be revised according to reviewers’ recommendations. If any suggestion is not incorporated, the author must provide written justification. Any errors or inaccuracies identified after publication must be reported to the editor as soon as possible.
Plagiarism is prohibited in all its forms, including literal reproduction without attribution, paraphrasing without reference, the use of secondary sources as if they were primary, the presentation of others’ work as one’s own, and the reuse of previously published text as new, a practice known as self-plagiarism.
Suspicions of plagiarism will be analyzed by the editorial team, ensuring the author’s right of defense. Once confirmed, sanctions may include a ban on new submissions for up to one year, as well as notification of the affected author and the institutions involved.
Correction and Retraction of Manuscripts
Articles will be retracted in the following cases
i) clear evidence of unreliable results due to error, fabrication or falsification
ii) plagiarism
iii) prior publication without proper attribution or editorial authorization
iv) use of data or material without authorization
v) violation of copyright or other legal provisions
vi) unethical research
vii) compromised peer review process
viii) undisclosed conflicts of interest affecting evaluation
ix) inappropriate or undeclared use of AI
REJUR follows COPE procedures for corrections and retractions, including erratum, addendum, partial correction and retraction. Requests must be sent by email and will be reviewed within 90 days with due process guaranteed. Retracted articles remain available with a watermark.
For more information on research ethics and best practices, see:
Principles of Transparency and Best Practices in Scholarly Publishing – COPE:
Ethical Guidelines for Reviewers – COPE:
English: https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines/cope-ethical-guidelines-peer-reviewers
Policy on Integrity in Scientific Activity – CNPq (Brazil):
Portuguese: https://www.in.gov.br/en/web/dou/-/portaria-cnpq-n-2.664-de-6-de-marco-de-2026-691779232
