Evaluation policies

The productions will be submitted to the analyses of the editorial board and to the appreciation of the journal’s advisory board, which in its peers, according to the double-blind review system, will issue a favorable opinion or not to the respective publication, based on determined criteria, which are:

  1. the submitted text presents a discussion or is in line with the theme of the current volume of the journal;
  2. the text brings an authentic and original discussion and proves scientific-bibliographic incursion around an object;
  3. the text is organized and arranged according to the ABNT general guidelines for the organization of scientific production and with strict observance of the rules for submission to the current volume of the journal;
  4. the text has theoretical consistency and reveals a mastery of the literature;
  5. the methodology used is adequate to the intended objectives;
  6. the analyses (if any) present consistency with the objectives defined and methodological rigor and signal non-redundant and productive conclusions.

Each submitted work will be destined to the analysis of 2 (two) referees who will have up to 3 (three) days, from the date of receiving a message/contact from the editorial board for this purpose, to accept or decline the nomination, and up to 15 days, in the case of acceptance, to return an opinion, indicating a favorable or unfavorable position regarding the acceptance for publication.

The member of the advisory board responsible for the analysis and assessment of the productions may issue:

  1. opinion indicating the acceptance of the text;
  2. opinion indicating acceptance of the text with reservations and respective notes or suggestions for amendment, of any order or nature;
  3. opinion refusing acceptance with comments justifying his position, based on the criteria summarized above.

The editorial board, in possession of the opinions, will send a message to the authors, assigning (in the case of item b) a deadline of 20 days to present a new version of the text.

If there is a contrary opinion, as expressed in item c, the editorial board will send the work to a third consultant.

In the event of item b, the organizers reserve the right to check whether the changes pointed out / suggested have been properly met and / or justified. If so, once in possession of a new version of the production, the editorial board will send a message of definitive acceptance of the work.

Once they have received an indication of acceptance and the evaluated texts have already been forwarded to the editing phase, they are fully ceded to publication in the respective volume and number of the journal, and therefore, the authors cannot decline to publish or refuse the publication. progress of the work to disseminate the material by Saridh Journal.

The reading and appreciation of the referees will be instruments that directly assist the decision-making by the editorial board on full acceptance, partial acceptance (and subject to the changes and modifications suggested for the improvement of production) and refusal.

The decline in acceptance for appreciation of the text will be linked to the impossibility of the member of the advisory board to conduct the reading due to:

  1. not feeling qualified to analyze the article;
  2. not having the availability of any order or nature to proceed with the assessment;
  3. note any form of identification or authorship mark in the text received in a way that links it to acquaintances, people with whom it may have any relationship or degree of closeness that, in some way, inculcates a partiality effect in the issuance of evaluation.

In all cases, the editorial board must be notified immediately.