The Brazilian Journal of Empirical Legal Studies is strongly committed to ethics and to the quality of its publications, not tolerating data fabrication, data falsification, plagiarism, self-plagiarism or any other misconduct throughout its editorial process.Therefore, all subjects involved in the activities of this Journal, editors, reviewers, authors and members of the editorial board must act according with the following principles:

Editors:

• The editors of a peer-reviewed journal are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. They may check with other members of the editorial board in making this decision.
• Editors should ensure that their decisions are in accordance with current legislation, especially regarding the protection of personal data, freedom of expression, defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
• Editors must make their decisions based on objective criteria and transparent arguments, such as the importance, validity, originality, clarity and relevance of the works submitted to this Journal. The manuscripts' evaluation must be made without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
• Editors must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
• Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research.
• Editors should refrain from judging manuscripts that may create any type of conflict of interest, whether due to personal, professional, competitive or collaborative relationships with any authors or institutions related to the paper.
• Editors must choose reviewers according to the subject of the study and must also observe whether there are conflicting interests between reviewers and authors. This situation should be seriously evaluated when requested by the authors or by the reviewers themselves.
• Editors must fulfill their assigned duties within the pre established deadlines.
• Editors should not reverse decisions regarding articles approved for publication unless pertinent new information becomes available.
• Editors should take responsibility for fostering and demanding ethical behavior from all other participants in the editorial process. They should also take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper. The editors should therefore always be willing to post corrections, clarifications, and retractions when necessary. In addition, in cases of conflict, the editors should be committed to listening to all subjects involved and considering their reasons equally.

Reviewers:

• Peer reviewers, through their evaluations, should assist the editors in making editorial decisions and contribute in improving the manuscripts submitted to the Journal. 
• Reviewers should ensure that their decisions are in accordance with current legislation, especially regarding the protection of personal data, freedom of expression, defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
• Reviewers must evaluate the manuscripts based on objective criteria and transparent arguments, such as the importance, validity, originality, clarity and relevance of the works submitted to this Journal. The manuscripts' evaluation must be made without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
• Reviewers must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than other members of the editorial board.
• Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer's own research.
• Reviewers should refrain from judging works that may create any type of conflict of interest, whether due to personal, professional, competitive or collaborative relationships with any authors or institutions related to the paper.
• Reviewers must fulfill their assigned duties within the pre established deadlines. Thus, the reviewers who, beforehand, are aware of any difficulty in fulfilling their respective tasks within the agreed timeframe should refuse the task in advance. Similarly, those who have accepted a task and subsequently become unable to fulfill their obligations should immediately notify the editorial board of the Journal, so that a new deadline or a replacement of the reviewer can be arranged.
• Reviewers must take responsibility for reporting any type of unethical conduct that they may perceive during their assigned activity. The reviewers should draw attention, for example, to any evidence of data fabrication, data falsification, plagiarism, self-plagiarism or lack of originality in the papers submitted to them or in articles already published in the Journal.

Authors:

• The Authors and the co-authors are specifically those who have significantly contributed to the conception, project, execution or interpretation of the submitted manuscript . Thus, authors must ensure that all co-authors have significantly contributed to its realization, have effectively approved its final version and have agreed to its submission to this journal. Situations such as equipment lending, obtaining financing or general supervision are not enough to promote the inclusion of an individual as an author. People with this kind of participation in the research should have their contributions recognized or listed as collaborators.It is also noteworthy that all authors are responsible for the entire content of the submitted manuscript , unless there is an explicit limitation to this rule.
• Authors should ensure that their decisions are in accordance with current legislation, especially regarding the protection of personal data, freedom of expression, defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
• Authors are expected to take all precautions in order to use only true information in their papers, avoiding any doubtful, inaccurate or false information to support their arguments.
• Authors are expected to present their research articles compatible with standards of original work. They must also take all necessary precautions to avoid any kind of plagiarism. Authors must also cite or mention in references if content or words of other articles are used.
• Authors should seek written permission from the source whenever they use any information obtained privately in their manuscript (e.g., conversations, correspondence or discussion with third parties). In addition, when information is collected as a result of confidential activities, authors must also request written permission from those involved in such activities.
• Authors should seek written permission from the source whenever they use any information obtained privately in their work (e.g., conversations, correspondence or discussion with third parties). Works that correspond essentially to the same research activity already reproduced in other articles are not considered unpublished.
• Authors are expected to elaborate an accurate account of the research carried out in their work and an objective analysis of the results. Moreover, authors should also present their research in a way that enables its replication by other researchers, thus, all procedures should be transparent and all references should be correctly indicated.
• Authors must be transparent and explicitly disclose in their work any type of conflict of interest that could affect the reliability of their results. Thus, authors must disclose all funding sources that made their research possible.
• Authors must respect the time limits set by the Journal and fulfill all tasks related to the editorial process within the pre established deadlines.
• Authors should immediately notify the editorial board of this journal whenever they observe a significant error, inaccuracy or any misconduct in their own work, even if it is under review or if it has already been published. Once the error has been acknowledged, the authors should cooperate with the editorial board in order to make the right amendments or corrections.

Editorial board:

• Editorial board members should ensure that their decisions are in accordance with current legislation, especially regarding the protection of personal data, freedom of expression, defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
• Editorial board members should base their activity on objective and transparent criteria, without precluding any submission based on the author’s ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, nationality or political philosophy.
• Editorial board team must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
• Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editorial board member's own research.
• Editorial board members should ensure that any source of commercial revenue or any other interest of their own or of the journal does not compromise the integrity of their activities.
• Editorial board members must fulfill their assigned duties within pre established deadlines.
• Editorial board members should assume responsibility for fostering and enforcing the ethical behavior of all those involved in the editorial process and should promptly forward to the Editors any complaints or suspicions of unethical content or activity. Thus, the editorial team must take all necessary precautions to avoid and to resolve any form of data fabrication, data falsification, plagiarism, self-plagiarism or lack of originality.

These guidelines are not intended to be exhaustive and were formulated based on guidelines published by internationally recognized bodies in the field of editorial ethics, such as:

- A Short Guide to Ethical Editing for New Editors - Committee On Publication Ethics (COPE);

- Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors - Committee On Publication Ethics (COPE);

- Código de Boas Práticas Científicas - Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP);

- Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing - Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA) e World Association of Medical Editors (WAME);

- Relatório da Comissão de Integridade de Pesquisa do CNPq - Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq).

In case of any loopholes in the above parameters, the national and international best practices will be used to resolve the issue, which is why it is highly recommended that all parties involved in the editorial process of this Journal read the aforementioned documents.

 

PRACTICAL MEASURES TO ENFORCE THE ETHICAL PRINCIPLES OF THE BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF EMPIRICAL LEGAL STUDIES

➜ What do we do to restrain plagiarism in our journal?

In general, our efforts focus on two main points: 

(a) prevent plagiarism from happening; and

(b) act effectively when it has already occurred.

Additionally,  we have a preponderantly educational approach and we seek to involve all parts of the publishing process in this task. Below, you can find some of the main measures adopted to restrain the practice of plagiarism in our journal:

• In the sections “Ethics Policy” and “Guidelines for Authors”, both must-read documents, we make it clear that we do not tolerate any type of misconduct, including, explicitly, the practice of plagiarism;
• When submitting their work, the authors declare that they are aware of the definition of plagiarism adopted by the journal and commit to take all necessary precautions to avoid incurring in this conduct;
• Among the questions to be answered by the reviewers' analysis, information about any evidence of plagiarism found in the submitted work is also required;
• We strongly encourage editors, reviewers, authors and readers to immediately inform our team of any indication of plagiarism, before or after the publication of the work;
• If there is suspicion of plagiarism in articles submitted to our journal, the steps suggested by COPE will be followed;
• If there is suspicion of plagiarism in articles published in our journal, the steps suggested by COPE will be followed.
  
  

➜ What do we do to avoid and to solve problems related to authorship in our journal?

In BJELS, we believe that authorship of the submitted articles is a serious matter and the researchers’ honesty in this regard is fundamental for the reliable construction of academic knowledge. Thus, any kind of unethical behavior related to this topic, such as practices known as gift/guest authorship and ghost authorship will not be tolerated.

To avoid problems related to articles’ authorship, we take the following measures:

• In the section “Ethics Policy”, which is compulsory reading for potential authors, the definition of authorship adopted by our Journal and our absolute intolerance of any kind of unethical behavior is made explicit;
• Also in the “Ethics Policy” section, we strongly encourage everyone involved in the editorial process to  report any suspicion of unethical behavior at any time. In this specific case, we are permanently open to receive complaints and willing to resolve issues that may arise related to authorship; 
• When submitting their work, authors must declare that they are aware of the definition of authorship adopted by the Journal, describing the collaboration of each author for the submitted work, and declaring that all information provided is true and including the consent of all authors;
• In addition, by submitting their work, authors declare that all authors and co-authors had access to the final version of the work submitted and they are in full agreement with its content.
• In cases where issues related to article authorship arise, we will take the following steps to solve them:
• Upon submission, if we receive any reports of unethical behavior related to authorship, we will suspend the reviewing process and set up a Commission made up of members from the editorial staff to evaluate the situation of those involved. This Commission will have the function of understanding the problem presented and solving the issue as appropriately as possible – for example, correcting the data presented at the time of submission or permanently rejecting the work;
• If, after publication, any reports of unethical behavior related to authorship are received, we will preemptively remove it from the Journal's website and set up a Commission made up of our editorial staff to dialogue with the parties involved. This Commission will analyze and evaluate the problem presented and resolve the issue as appropriately as possible - for example, by publishing a rectification or permanently deleting the work.

For further information on authorship, important definitions and suggestions for new researchers, we recommend reading the COPE report: "How to handle authorship disputes: a guide for new researchers", written by Tim Albert e Elizabeth Wager, in 2003.

These measures are not intended to be exhaustive and they were formulated based on publications from internationally recognized bodies in the editorial ethics field, such as:

- How to recognise potential authorship problems (COPE);

- How to spot authorship problems (COPE);

- What to do if you suspect ghost, guest or gift authorship (COPE);

- Changes in authorship: (a) Corresponding author requests addition of extra author before publication (COPE);

- Changes in authorship: (b) Corresponding author requests removal of author before publication (COPE);

- Changes in authorship: (c) Request for addition of extra author after publication (COPE);

- Changes in authorship: (d) Request for removal of author after publication (COPE).

If there is any loophole in the measures initially established by our Journal, we will use the best national and international practices to resolve the issue, which is why it is recommended that all parties involved in the editorial process read the above documents.