Ethical Principles for Scholarly Publication
Ethical Principles for Scholarly Publication
Editors ethical principles
ARS (São Paulo) adopts the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the Code of Good Scientific Practice of Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP), and the Guia de boas práticas para o fortalecimento da ética na publicação científica of SciELO as references to implementing best scientific practices in all stages of work, from the submission of articles to its publication.
ARS’ Editors declare their commitment to identifying and preventing the publication of articles which present indications of misconduct in research and ethics violation, especially in the case of plagiarism, citation manipulation, data falsification, lack of required authorizations, expression of discriminatory opinions, among others.
Cases such as the ones listed above will be analyzed by the Editors individually. If the misconduct is identified in any article still in the process of evaluation, the peer review process will be suspended until the verification of the case. If concerning an already published article by ARS, and if there are sufficient concrete indications that prove this behavior, the journal will release a retraction note, in which must clearly stated the reasons for its publication.
After the peer review process of evaluation is completed, the authors are assured the right to demand a reassessment of the process, as long as presented with a written justification for the request. Each appeal will be individually analyzed by the editorial team. The editors have complete autonomy to accept or dismiss the solicitations and are engaged with the guidelines of good scientific practices of the journal.
It is up to the editors to select the reviewers in order to minimize possible conflicts of interest between authors and evaluators. If such a situation may occur, the editorial team will forward the paper to a new suitable reviewer to the article.
The Editors make themselves available for any requests from the authors of corrections in published articles, provided that the technical feasibility of the rectifications in each case is respected.
Authors ethical principles
All content submitted is of exclusive responsibility of the author, as is obtaining written permission to use copyright-protected materials in their articles.
Articles submitted with multiple authorship will be evaluated with the understanding that all listed authors agree with the submission and that the final version of the article has been approved by all co-authors.
All papers are submitted to an orthographical, grammatical and stylistic review. The editorial team reserves the right to decline articles whose suggested amendments were not taken in consideration in the final version of the paper without further justification.
It is expected that authors that have already published in Ars contribute as reviewers periodically. The journal reserves the right to not forward articles written by researchers who have repeatedly refused requests for participating in the peer review process.
Evaluators ethical principles
The evaluators are responsible for communicating to the editorial team any conflict of interest that could compromise the fairness of the evaluation process, whether personal, financial, intellectual, professional, political or religious.
If a close working relationship between the author and the assigned reviewer (advisor/supervisor, participation in the same research, same financial support etc.) is identified, it is the reviewer's responsibility to communicate it to the editorial team.
Evaluators must respect the principle of confidentiality in the blind peer review system.
It is expected that evaluators respond to the solicitation for reviewing an article in the period assigned – even if to decline it – and that they meet the evaluation deadlines stipulated by the editors.
Intellectual Property
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the first publication rights, with their work licensed by Creative Commons BY-CC License. After the articles are published, the authors retain copyright and the right to republish the paper.
Anti-plagiarism policy
As a means of reinforcing the ethical principles that conduct our process of evaluation and publishing, Ars employs the anti-plagiarism resources and tools available to the scientific community at USP, such as iThenticate.
Suspicions or accusations of plagiarism will be investigated by the editorial team. If confirmed, one of the following actions will be taken: for articles still in the process of evaluation, the editorial process will be suspended; for already published articles, a retraction note will be released.
Authorship and AI tools
In accordance with the 2024 COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) statement, ARS Journal declares that AI tools cannot meet the requirements for authorship; they cannot assert the presence or absence of conflicts of interest; nor manage copyright and license agreements. Authors are fully responsible for the content of their manuscript, and are thus liable for any breach of publication ethics adopted by this Journal.
