Ethics

CODE OF ETHICS – RBHC

 

The Revista Brasileira de História da Ciência (RBHC) is a biannual journal, indexed and arbitrated by the Brazilian Society of History of Science (SBHC), started in 1985. Through the publication of articles, essays, and reviews of unpublished books; annotated transcriptions and translations of inaccessible primary sources; testimonials, debates, and interviews, RBHC seeks to disseminate original, unpublished, and quality works in the History of Science and Technology. It also recognizes the dialogue in the fields of Philosophy, Sociology, and Science Teaching.

 

We present below the RBHC Code of Ethics, inspired by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines. This Code of Ethics establishes the transparency links between editing, authorship, evaluation, and circulation of works among readers.

 

Editorial team

The RBHC editorial team is composed of the Editorial Committee and the Scientific Advisory Board.

 

Editorial Committee

The RBHC Editorial Committee is composed of a Chief Editor and two Deputy Editors, all three researchers in the History of Science and Technology. They are linked to three public institutions of higher education and research in Brazil, with recognized importance in the national and international scene. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for managing the journal, verifying compliance with editorial standards, directing the editorial process, and ensuring compliance with the Code of Ethics. The Editor-in-Chief and Deputy Editors are responsible for the peer review process.

 

Scientific Advisory Board

The Scientific Advisory Board is formed by eminent researchers in the History of Science and Technology, linked to national and international institutions of great prestige. Its role is to assist the Editorial Committee in preparing opinions for articles submitted to the journal, prospecting new reviewers, and collaborating with editorial decisions and on the functioning of the journal.

Consult the Editorial Team page to view the people and institutions that collaborate with the RBHC.

 

Authors

The following terms must be observed and adhered to by authors who wish to publish in the RBHC:

 

Authorship

Registration in the system and subsequent access, through login and password, are mandatory for the submission of works, as well as to monitor the ongoing editorial process. For recognition of the authors of the manuscript, they must have participated in all stages of its preparation: choice of theme, methodology, analysis, and interpretation of sources, as well as the final writing. Authors who have articles accepted for publication must comply with a 1-year gap to submit new work, starting from the date of submission of the previous article.

 

Academic degree

As of December 2023, to submit an article to the RBHC, the authors must be at an undergraduate student.

 

Bibliographic references

Manuscript submissions are conditioned to the joint presentation of the list of bibliographic references used in the original. Specific instructions for each section of the RBHC were stipulated in the Submissions.

 

Copyright

Works submitted to RBHC will be licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license. The sharing (copying and redistribution of the material in any medium or format) and adaptation (remixing and transformation of the material for other purposes) of the published originals concern this type of license, provided that the respective authorship credit and initial publication in this journal are observed. The opinions expressed in any published contribution do not necessarily reflect those of the Editors, members of the Scientific Advisory Board, or the Brazilian Society of History of Science (Board of Directors, Deliberative Council, or associates in general), being always the responsibility of their authors. The Editors reserve the right to introduce small changes in the writing and presentation of originals approved for publication, aiming to maintain the uniformity and quality of the journal, respecting the style and opinions of the authors. It is up to the Editors to make the final decision regarding the publication of the contributions received.

 

Fees

RBHC does not charge a fee from its authors.

 

Financial Support for Research

Financial support from funding agencies or foundations must be disclosed by the authors.

 

Identification

It is mandatory to inform the ORCID identifier (Open Researcher and Contributor ID) for all authors of the accepted article.

 

Originality

Submitted manuscripts must be within the scope of the RBHC, that is, original, unpublished, and quality works in the area of History of Science and Technology, recognizing the importance of its articulation with the fields of Philosophy, Sociology, and Science Teaching. Clippings of theses/dissertations are not accepted. All articles derived from theses/dissertations must present their coherence and completeness, without dependence on the reading of the source material.

 

Reviewers

The evaluation process follows the double-blind regime and has an average duration of four months between article submission and the final decision. In the case of topics where there is little availability of specialists, particularly in Brazil and for articles in Portuguese, authors should be aware that the evaluation time can be significantly extended. If they pass the preliminary editorial review, which determines whether any contributions will be considered for publication, they are submitted to two experts for evaluation (except in the case of submissions to the Reviews, Documents, Sources, Interviews and Testimonials, Letters, and Translation sections, which may be accepted by the editorial act). In case of a conflict of interests or divergence between the reviewers, the work will be sent to a third reviewer.

 

Readers

RBHC adopts the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC BY 4.0), which implies free access and sharing of content, provided that the respective authorship credit and initial publication in this journal are observed. Possible errors and problems will be communicated to the Editor-in-Chief.

 

Privacy Policy

The names and addresses informed in this magazine will be used exclusively for the services provided by this publication, not being made available for other purposes or to third parties.

 

Peer Review Process

All works submitted to the RBHC are submitted to a preliminary editorial evaluation by the editors, which seeks to verify if they are framed in the focus and scope of the journal. If approved at this stage, they go on to be evaluated by two experts in the topic of the text under consideration. In case of disagreement, the work will be sent to a third reviewer.

 

The referees evaluate the submitted works regarding originality, theoretical and methodological foundation, clarity in the arguments and conclusions, and insertion in existing studies on the subject of the work, among other points.

 

The result of the evaluation can be:

• Submission rejected in preliminary editorial review;
• Accepted without modifications;
• Accepted with modifications. In this case, the authors must submit a corrected version, accompanied by a letter indicating the corrections/alterations made;
• Declined;
• The work must be resubmitted for evaluation. In this case, a new evaluation process will be initiated, going through all the editorial stages.

 

In some cases, works sent to the Reviews, Documents and Sources, Interviews and Testimonials, Letters, and Translation sections may be accepted by the editorial act.

In any case, the final decision will rest with the editors.

The list of reviewers in each volume is always published in the second issue.

 

Plagiarism Policy

The work does not contain plagiarism or self-plagiarism. Following the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines for Text Recycling, editors understand plagiarism to be the appropriation, incorporation, or copying of ideas and excerpts from articles without acknowledgment of authorship or source. Self-plagiarism occurs when sections of the same text appear (usually without attribution) in more than one author's publication.

 

RBHC uses, through an agreement with the Brazilian Association of Scientific Editors (ABEC), the Similarity Check software, to guarantee that all work submitted and published by the journal does not contain any plagiarism. Any identified plagiarism or self-plagiarism will result in the immediate rejection of the submission.

 

Correction and Retraction Policy

Any errors will be corrected by the authors at the request of the Editorial Team, observing the details below, by the Guidelines for Retraction of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

 

Editors should consider correcting and retracting a publication if:

a) They have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, whether as the result of a major error (e.g. miscalculation or experimental error) or as a result of fabrication (e.g. data) or falsification (e.g., image manipulation);

b) Identified plagiarism or self-plagiarism

c) Research findings were published elsewhere without communication to the editors;

d) The copyright has been infringed or there is some other serious legal issue (for example, defamation, privacy, or unauthorized data use);

e) Reports unethical research;

f) Was published solely based on a compromised or manipulated peer review process;

g) The authors had not reported a material conflict of interest that, in the editor's view, would have unduly affected the interpretations of the manuscript or the recommendations of the editors and reviewers.

 

Correction and retraction notices must:

a) Be linked to the corrected or retracted article;

b) identify the corrected or retracted article (for example, including the title and authors in the header of the retraction or citing the retracted article);

c) Be identified as a correction or retraction (ie, distinct from other types of correction or comment);

d) Be published immediately, to minimize harmful effects;

e) Be available free of charge to all readers;

f) Declare who is correcting or retracting the article;

g) Indicate the reason(s) for correction or retraction;

h) Be objective, factual and avoid inflammatory language.

 

A post will not be corrected and retracted if:

a) Despite possible dispute over the authorship of the manuscript, there is no reason to doubt the validity of the findings;

b) Research findings remain reliable and correction can resolve possible errors;

c) The editors have inconclusive evidence to support the retraction or are awaiting further information, such as from an institutional investigation;

d) The authors' conflicts of interest were reported to the journal after publication but, in the opinion of the editors, are not likely to have influenced the interpretations or conclusions of the article.