Code of Conduct and Good Practice in Research

BJR adopts a policy of promoting integrity in research, following the guidelines of the SciELO Good Practice Guide for strengthening ethics in scientific publishing. In addition, we encourage authors to consult the Journal's Code of Conduct and Good Research Practices and the rules of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). In this way, we present the main guidelines that guide the best practices of authors, reviewers and editors of the journal. As described in article 24 of its Regulation:

“Article 24 – BJR is committed to developing practices that guarantee the appropriateness and quality of articles it publishes.

I – The Code of Conduct and Good Research Practices adopted by the journal are available on its website.
II – BJR encourages its collaborators (editorial staff and reviewers) to comment on the originality of articles and to be aware of duplicate publication and/or plagiarism.”

In this way, we present the main guidelines that guide the best practices of authors, reviewers and editors of the journal.



Originality. All articles from authors must be original. Any citations must be referenced in accordance with the Guidelines for Authors. Plagiarism or self-plagiarism is a crime under law (Law 9.610/98) and will be treated as such.

BJR exercises a plagiarism detection policy. If plagiarism is detected, the journal reserves the right to publish an erratum and/or remove the article from the journal, and/or prohibit the author from publishing.

Multiple Publications. Authors should not submit the same article to more than one journal at a time.

Authorship and Collaboration. Authorship is restricted to those who made a significant contribution to the concept, planning, execution or interpretation of the study. Any individual who participated in any part of the research project and/or the submitted article should be listed as a contributor in a footnote.

The primary author of the article, co-authors, and other credits are defined based on scientific merit and the type of contribution provided to the article, regardless of the status or title of the authors, this includes cases where articles are co-signed by thesis or dissertation supervisors.

All authors and co-authors must be cognizant of and in agreement with the submission of the article.

Author Contributions. Articles which have two or more authors must describe the contributions each researcher made to the article. We recommend that authors fulfill at least two basic functions in the elaboration of the article they intend to submit to the journal: a) active participation in the discussion of the results; b) review and approval of the final version of the article. We further recommend that specific contributions regarding the layout, theoretical and methodological approaches, and the writing of the article be listed.

Funding. If funding is available, all sources must be properly cited in the submission.

Request for Review. All authors have the right to request a second review if they consider the first review to be inappropriate. Requests for review must be sent to the editor in a letter stating the reasons why a second review is solicited. Requests for review will be evaluated by the journal's management after consulting with the editor in charge of submissions.



Function. Reviewers are responsible for evaluating whether the article should be accepted for publication in the journal, or not. Reviewers must analyze the articles for originality, for appropriateness to the scope of the journal and/or the thematic dossier. They also analyze the methodology, scientific rigor, topicality, and relevance of the theoretical framework.

Confidentiality. Evaluations are blind. Reviewers must treat documents as confidential. Reviewers must not show or discuss the article with others, or disclose any information said article contains before it is published.

Qualifications. Any reviewer who does not feel qualified to review the article must contact the editor as soon as they have access to the request email.

Punctuality. Reviewers must be able to meet the evaluation deadline and communicate their availability in the journal's system. If any reviewer is unable to meet the deadline due to some unforeseen event, they must inform the editor as soon as possible so another reviewer can be assigned.

Feedback to authors. Reviewers do not send direct feedback to the author. This is handled by the editor in charge of submissions.

Plagiarism. Reviewers must work together when identifying self-plagiarism and plagiarism.

Submitting Articles. Reviewers submit articles to the journal and follow the same rules and regulations that apply to authors. However, editors should avoid requesting reviews from researchers whose submissions are being evaluated by the BJR at that time.



Editing. The editors are responsible for ensuring the integrity of the review process. Editors must comply with all legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism.

Confidentiality. The editors, and other members of the editorial team, must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript, except to reviewers.

Publication. The editors must inform the author of which edition the article will be published in.

Conflicts of Interest. The editors must refuse to edit any manuscript which they may have a conflict of interest with due to competitive or collaborative issues, or any other relationship or connection to any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with said manuscript.

Involvement and Cooperation with Investigations. The editors must follow necessary guidelines when ethical complaints are raised regarding a submitted manuscript or published article.