Evaluation

Revista Vórtex accepts submissions on a continuous basis, in Portuguese, English or Spanish, and in the categories of article, review, translation and interview. Authors can choose between two submission categories:

a) Submission for Double Blind Evaluation;
b) Open Science submission, via SciELO PrePrint (IN PROCESS OF IMPLEMENTATION);

DOUBLE-BLIND EVALUATION

The double-blind evaluation begins when the article is submitted. The editor carries out the initial screening and assigns two reviewers in a double-blind system, in which reviewers and authors remain anonymous. With the opinions in hand, an editorial decision is made and the authors are informed. Below are detailed instructions for submitting your work to the double-blind evaluation system:

1) Submit your work via the journal's submission platform (OJS): https://vortex.unespar.edu.br
2) Make sure you meet all the “Conditions for submission” that your manuscript complies with the “Guidelines for Authors”.
3) All material for evaluation must be anonymous.

SCIELO PREPRINT EVALUATION (OPEN SCIENCE)

The PrePrint category is a new feature in Vortex Journal and works as a way of encouraging Open Science. PrePrint refers to versions of an article that are shared publicly before undergoing peer review. Articles deposited in the SciELO PrePrint repository receive a DOI (digital object identifier) registration, which ensures authorship and allows them to be cited. This practice provides immediate access to research results and allows authors to receive comments from readers about their study, making it possible to make changes deemed pertinent. This whole process takes place within the SciELO PrePrint platform. At the end of this stage, the article can be submitted for evaluation and subsequent publication in Revista Vórtex. The evaluation opinions will be attached to the end of the text, in the “PrePrint” section of our document template (template.docx), and the names and institutional affiliations of the evaluators will be published together. Below are detailed instructions for submitting your work to the PrePrint evaluation system:

1) Deposit your manuscript in the SciELO PrePrint repository: https://preprints.scielo.org
2) At the same time, or later, send your finished work - already incorporating the suggestions from the PrePrint comments - via the journal's submission platform (OJS): https://vortex.unespar.edu.br
3) In the “Comments for the editor” field, state that the manuscript has been deposited and published on the SciELO PrePrint server. Provide a link (URL).
4) In the “Documents” tab, upload the text containing the authors' names and mark it as “Text”.
5) In the “Documents” tab, upload the attachment “Open Science Compliance Form” and mark it as “Open Science Compliance Form”.

PEER REVIEW PROCESS

The following are our journal's policies regarding the double-blind peer review process. Part of this content is adapted for the PrePrint system:

- Reviewers should help authors objectively, pointing out relevant work that could be cited. They should also instruct authors on how to improve their work for publication;
- Reviewers should have no conflict of interest and should remain neutral and impartial with regard to the authors' nationality, religious or political beliefs, gender or other characteristics;
- The peer review process should be treated with confidence and should only involve designated editors and reviewers;
- In the peer review process, the confidentiality of names is guaranteed (double-blind); a list of reviewers will be published at the end of the publication process, but will not relate the reviewer to each article.
- Editors and reviewers must respect the intellectual independence of the authors;
- On rare occasions, editors may provide opinions.

The “Evaluation Form” used on our platform for reviewers reads as follows:

“The review is anonymous and may be sent to the author. Please do not share your name or contact details. Some observations: [1] respect the confidentiality of the material provided to you; [2] remember that all reviews must be conducted objectively, i.e. personal criticism of the author is inappropriate; [3] inform us in the event of a conflict of interest; [4] after the publication of each issue, the journal will make available on its website the identity of the reviewers and their institutional affiliations for the issue in question. The double-blind peer review system will always be respected. Articles will not be associated with the reviewers.

[1] Does the work make a relevant contribution to the field?
[2] Do the title, abstract and keywords express the content of the work?
[3] Is the theoretical foundation or methodology consistent?
[4] Is the language used clear? Does the text need grammar or spelling revision?
[5] Do the citations comply with the author-date system?
[6] Are all the stated references cited in the body of the text?
[7] Are the images and illustrations legible?
[8] General quality of the work?
[9] Final opinion
[10] General comment (optional)”