Peer review process
Preliminary assessment
The articles and documents submitted to Revista IDeAS will be preliminarily examined by the Editorial Committee, which will verify the adequacy to the following editorial policy requirements:
1) does not constitute plagiarism, according to the verification process;
2) strictly follows the formatting and bibliographic citation rules required by the journal;
3) falls within the scope and main objective of the journal, which is "to encourage debate and the circulation of information about the 'rural world', at the interface between development, agriculture and society".
After approval at this stage, the manuscripts will be sent to reviewers. Contributions will be evaluated by at least two external reviewers (peer review) in the double blind review system, keeping the names of authors and reviewers confidential.
Double-blind Peer review
The double-blind peer review is fully carried out through the Open Journal Systems (OJS), which guarantees the anonymity of the parties involved (authors and reviewers).
Revista IDeAS has its own form that consists of several questions which must be answered strictly by reviewers. The form includes a final text box for comments deemed appropriate and relevant.
The reviewers of Revista IDeAS are external to the journal's team and hold a doctorate in related areas.
The Editorial Committee is responsible for selecting reviewers who are independent of the authors, i.e., not affiliated with the same institution.
The phases for assessing contributions will be as follows:
a) evaluation of plagiarism and compliance or not with the rules of formatting and bibliographic citation required;
b) assessment of the proximity between the article and the journal's editorial policy;
c) double-blind evaluation of merit and content of articles by two external reviewers (double-blind peer review);
d) the reviewers will be independent (not affiliated with the same institution of the authors);
e) the peers (with a doctoral degree) will be chosen according to their academic specialty and can:
(1) recommend publication;
(2) recommend publication as long as required revisions are made;
(3) do not recommend publication.
f) if the contribution is approved by the two peers, it will be published, if it is rejected by both, it will be excluded and if it is approved by one and rejected by another, it will be sent to a third party who will decide on the publication or not of the article;
g) the editors will communicate the peers' decisions to the authors and will require the modifications suggested by them when applicable.
h) the editors will review whether the suggestions were incorporated by the authors. If so, the article or review will be published, if not, it will be discarded and the author will be informed of the reasons for the disqualification.
Complaints. Authors may send resources, suggestions or complaints related to the evaluation procedure or results through the submission system or by e-mail revistaideas@gmail.com. Depending on the case, the decision will be extended for discussion within the scope of the Editorial Committee. The resolution issued by the editors will be final and will end the claim process.
Final decision. The Editorial Committee reserves the right to make the final decision on publication, upon satisfactory evaluation of the reformulated article.
Misconduct. Denunciations or identification of misconduct are also subject to analysis and judgment by the Editorial Committee. To guide the investigation and decisions, the Code of Ethics and Conduct was prepared.
Whenever necessary, editors of Revista IDeAS will also seek guidance on good practices, guidelines and case studies from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Thus, we seek to achieve the highest ethical standards in publications. The Editorial Board may be consulted by the editors, but the final decision will always rest with the Editorial Committee.
Authors are also encouraged to contribute to the quality control of the publishing process, especially with regard to respecting the deadlines set by the journal itself.
Deadlines for the evaluation process
1. Initial notification. An automatic notification is sent by the system when a manuscript is submitted to the journal. This notification is sent to the author's email and serves as proof of submission.
2. Preliminary analysis by the editors. The journal undertakes to analyze and send the manuscript for evaluation or return it to authors within 15 days. Requests to adapt the manuscript to the journal's parameters are subject to further analysis and extension of the deadline for this stage.
3. Peer review. The journal will seek to communicate the result of the manuscript evaluation within a maximum period of 90 days. However, it will always be sought to reduce this period as much as possible.
Authors can contact editors at any time by e-mail revistaideas@gmail.com to request information regarding the status of their submission.
Ensuring blind peer review
To ensure the integrity of blind peer review, for submissions to the journal, every possible care must be taken not to reveal the identity of authors and reviewers among them during the process. This requires that authors, editors and reviewers (who may submit documents to the system as part of the evaluation process) take some precautions with the text and properties of the document:
- The authors of the document excluded names from the text, replacing "Author" and the year in references and footnotes, instead of authors' names, article title, etc.
- In Microsoft Office documents, the author identification must be removed from the document's properties (in the File> Properties menu), starting with File, in the main menu, and clicking on the sequence: File> Save as ...> Tools (or Mac Options)> Security Options ...> Remove personal information from file when saving> OK> Save.
- In PDFs, the names of the authors must also be removed from the Document Properties, under File in the Adobe Acrobat main menu.
Plagiarism check
Before being submitted for peer review, papers submitted to the IDeAS are examined in the Plagius Professional software for detecting plagiarism, or similar. If a suspicion identified by the tool is confirmed by manual evaluation, it is possible that the journal will question the authors in order to guarantee the publication of original works. We affirm that plagiarism is configured as unacceptable editorial behavior and, if its existence is proven, authors will be prohibited from submitting works to the journal again
