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)

In accordance with the Open Science guidelines, Revista Vórtex adopts transparency and information sharing practices, promoting the open access policy, the use of open repositories and the publication of Preprints on public platforms such as SciELO Preprints (https://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo). Preprints refer to versions of an article that are shared publicly before undergoing peer review.

Articles deposited in the SciELO Preprint (https://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo) repository are registered with a DOI (digital object identifier), 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 (https://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo). 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. Authors are encouraged to deposit and share the data, codes and/or methods used in the production of their manuscripts. The journal offers authors and reviewers the option of opening up the peer review process, with or without identifying their names.

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”.
6) Open Data: peer review is open.

OPEN SCIENCE COMPLIANCE

Revista Vórtex follows the Gold Open Access model. Authors are asked to state: (a) whether the manuscript is a preprint and, if so, its location; (b) whether data, program code and other materials underlying the text of the manuscript are properly cited and referenced; and, (c) whether they accept openness options in the peer review process. Authors are encouraged to make available all content (data, program code and other materials) underlying the text of the manuscript prior to or at the time of publication. Exceptions are allowed in cases of legal and ethical issues. The aim is to facilitate the evaluation of the manuscript and, if approved, to contribute to the preservation and reuse of the contents and the reproducibility of the research. Revista Vórtex adopts the Open Science Compliance Form:
https://wp.scielo.org/wp-content/uploads/Open-Science-Compliance-Form_en.docx

OPEN DATA (SciELO Preprints)

In line with Open Science guidelines, Revista Vórtex adopts transparency and information sharing practices, promoting the open access policy, the use of open repositories and the publication of preprints on public platforms such as SciELO Preprints. Authors are encouraged to deposit and share the data, codes and/or methods used in the production of their manuscripts. Authors are responsible for storing and accessing the data, which should be deposited in open access repositories such as SciELO Data. To facilitate reuse, data should be made available in open formats (e.g. spreadsheets rather than PDFs). If the data is restricted, the restriction must be justified in the article and a contact point for requesting access must be provided. The journal offers authors and referees the option of opening up the peer review process, with or without identifying their names. We recommend the SciELO data repository Data: https://data.scielo.org/

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST POLICY

Authors, reviewers and editors must ensure the absence of conflicts of interest throughout the publication process. Conflicts of interest can arise in situations related to the nationality, religious or political beliefs, gender or other characteristics of the authors, as well as of a personal, commercial, political, academic or financial nature. When submitting a manuscript, authors must inform the editors of any possible conflict of interest by sending an e-mail (revista.vortex@unespar.edu.br) at the same time as the submission. Reviewers must maintain a neutral and impartial stance. If they identify any conflict of interest with the authors – whether institutional, as recent co-authors, or of a personal nature – they should inform the editors immediately.

PEER REVIEW PROCESS

Revista Vórtex operates on a continuous publication system (1 volume per year), i.e. once the evaluation and editing process is complete, the work is published. The approximate time between submission and publication is up to 6 months. The entire process follows this flow:

- The editors make a first reading of the manuscript and decide whether the work is of interest to the journal (2 weeks);
- The editors analyze the profile and invite two reviewers for the task (2 weeks);
- The reviewers evaluate the work (12 weeks);
- Based on the evaluations, the editors decide on publication or rejection (2 weeks);
- If accepted with necessary corrections and revisions, the manuscript returns to the authors (3 weeks);
- Once accepted, the manuscript goes to Publishing, where it will be prepared for publication, with DOI assignment and layout finalization (3 weeks).

In addition, the journal offers authors and reviewers the option of opening the peer review process, with or without identifying their names.

These are the responsibilities of the reviewers:

- 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 must not have a conflict of interest and must remain neutral and impartial, informing the editors if any conflict arises. Possible cases of conflicts of interest include: nationality, religious or political beliefs, gender or other characteristics of the authors; conflicts of a personal, commercial, political, academic or financial nature. These conflicts can occur between authors, reviewers or editors;
- 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)”