ETHICAL GUIDELINES

Document version 1.1. Last review: 30/12/2024.

Introduction

The SOUTHERN JOURNAL OF SCIENCES is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics and academic integrity in scientific publishing. This comprehensive ethical framework, established in accordance with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines, serves as the foundation for all publications within our journal. Our ethical guidelines are designed to ensure transparency, fairness, and scientific rigor throughout the publication process.

These guidelines draw from multiple respected sources in academic publishing, including the Declaration of Helsinki for research involving human participants, the International Council for Laboratory Animal Science (ICLAS), and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) recommendations. By adhering to these established standards, we aim to protect the rights and welfare of research participants, maintain scientific integrity, and promote ethical research practices.

Our ethical framework encompasses several critical areas: the peer review process, authorship criteria, research ethics involving human participants and animals, plagiarism prevention, and publication malpractice. We employ a rigorous double-blind peer review system where both reviewers and authors remain anonymous throughout the evaluation process, ensuring an unbiased assessment of scientific merit. Additionally, we maintain strict policies regarding authorship attribution, requiring substantial contributions from all listed authors and appropriate acknowledgment of all research contributors.

The journal places particular emphasis on protecting human research participants and ensuring ethical treatment of animal subjects in research. All studies involving human participants must comply with the Declaration of Helsinki and receive appropriate ethics committee approval. Similarly, animal research must adhere to institutional, national, and international guidelines, with proper documentation of ethical approvals and compliance with animal welfare standards.

Through these guidelines, we aim to foster a research environment that promotes scientific excellence while maintaining the highest ethical standards in academic publishing. This document serves as a comprehensive resource for authors, reviewers, and editors, outlining their respective responsibilities and the ethical principles that govern our publication process.

Southern Journal of Sciences (SJS) and Araucária Scientific Association

Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) Initiative

Our Mission and Commitment

The Southern Journal of Sciences (SJS) shares the Araucária Scientific Association's commitment to transformative research and societal impact. Our initiative aims to connect researchers addressing the world's most pressing challenges with practitioners in policy and business, enabling rapid dissemination of articles that directly contribute to the Sustainable Development Goals.

Goal 4 - Quality Education: Our Key Priority

Among the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, Goal 4 - Quality Education - stands as a cornerstone of our scholarly mission. We recognize quality education as a fundamental catalyst for individual empowerment and collective societal progress. Our approach extends beyond academic discourse, actively promoting educational advancement through multiple strategic channels.

Our Commitment to Educational Research

The journal's approach to supporting Goal 4 includes:

  • Promoting research that explores innovative educational methodologies
  • Providing open access to scholarly work, thereby democratizing knowledge
  • Supporting researchers investigating educational challenges across diverse global contexts
  • Encouraging interdisciplinary approaches to understanding educational ecosystems

Research Opportunities and Collaborative Initiatives

As part of our environmental and scientific commitment, we offer unique research opportunities. Researchers interested in studying the Atlantic Forest biome can request access to forest areas for environmental and hydrological research, creating a bridge between academic inquiry and practical conservation efforts. For further information, please contact our office.

Publishing and Visibility Strategy

We make our scholarly publishing activities more visible and accessible through diverse communication channels. Our goal is to ensure that critical scientific insights reach practitioners, policymakers, and businesses who can translate research into tangible improvements for our world.

Core Principles

  • Transparent and open access publishing
  • Rapid dissemination of impactful research
  • Support for multidisciplinary scientific exploration
  • Commitment to sustainable development goals

Invitation to Researchers

We invite researchers, practitioners, and innovators to join our mission of creating meaningful scientific knowledge that addresses global challenges. By combining rigorous academic standards with a commitment to societal impact, we aim to be a catalyst for positive change.

Through these efforts, we align our scholarly practices with the broader vision of sustainable development, believing that high-quality, accessible research is a critical pathway to addressing complex global challenges.

Endorsed Guidelines

The SOUTHERN JOURNAL OF SCIENCES embraces a comprehensive ethical framework by incorporating guidelines from leading international organizations in scholarly publishing. The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) provides our foundational framework, which we enhance through complementary guidelines from other respected organizations. Each source contributes unique value: Elsevier's guidelines offer practical insights from publishing experience, PsychOpen addresses specific needs in behavioral and social science research, and the World Association of Medical Editors provides guidance on editorial integrity. For research involving human subjects, we follow the Declaration of Helsinki and International Committee of Medical Journal Editors' standards, while animal research adheres to the International Council for Laboratory Animal Science's guidelines. Together, these guidelines create a robust framework that ensures scientific integrity while promoting the advancement of knowledge. Authors, reviewers, and editors must understand and follow these integrated guidelines to maintain our high standards of academic publishing.

Publication Ethics

General Ethics Information

Compliance with publication ethics ensures the integrity of scientific publishing and confidence in published articles. Therefore, the SOUTHERN JOURNAL OF SCIENCES expects all authors to adhere to ethical requirements when preparing their manuscripts.

Authors should observe high standards concerning publication ethics as set out by the Commission on Publication Ethics (COPE). Falsification or fabrication of data, plagiarism, duplicate publication of the authors' work without proper citation, and misappropriation of the work are unacceptable practices. Any cases of ethical misconduct are treated very seriously and will be dealt with following the COPE guidelines.

The SOUTHERN JOURNAL OF SCIENCES employs a fully double-blind peer-review process where both reviewers and authors remain anonymous throughout the review process. All articles submitted for publication undergo an initial editorial screening. When a submission is considered appropriate, it is sent to two reviewers under the editorial policies and with a minimum quality level. The reviewers will not know the identity of the authors, as any identifying information will be stripped from the document before review.

Once authors submit a paper, the manuscript undergoes a comprehensive initial screening process before entering the formal review phase. The first steps involve automated analyses through specialized software tools to detect potential plagiarism, identify undisclosed AI-generated content that might be unethical or dishonest, and evaluate grammar and language quality to ensure compliance with academic writing standards. After these automated verifications, Editors evaluate the paper composition and arrangement according to Journal submission guidelines, which includes reviewing required sections and stylizations, verifying alignment with the Journal scope, and confirming originality and topical relevance. When manuscripts pass these initial screenings, they move to a designated Editor-in-Chief, who manages the subsequent review process by appointing at least two referees with expertise in the relevant field. These expert reviewers, selected to avoid any institutional or personal connections to the authors, conduct thorough evaluations of the manuscript and provide constructive, anonymized feedback to help authors improve their work.

ETHICS COMMITTEE APPROVAL ON RESEARCH WITH HUMAN

Research involving human participants, human material, or human data must have been performed following the Declaration of Helsinki and must have been approved by an appropriate ethics committee. A statement detailing this, including the name of the ethics committee and the reference number where appropriate, must appear in all manuscripts reporting such research. Suppose a study has been granted an exemption from requiring ethics approval. In that case, this should also be detailed in the manuscript (including the name of the ethics committee that granted the exemption). Further information and documentation to support this should be made available to the Editor on request. Manuscripts may be rejected if the Editor considers that the research has not been carried out within an appropriate ethical framework. In rare cases, the Editor may contact the ethics committee for further information.

Research on human participants, which includes identifiable human material or identifiable data, requires ethical protection. According to the Declaration of Helsinki issued by the World Medical Association, research on human participants should be formulated in experimental protocols. These should be submitted to independent ethical review boards (ethics committees and institutional review boards) for approval. Additionally, every potential participant should be informed about the "aims, methods, sources of funding, any possible conflicts of interest, institutional affiliations of the researcher, the anticipated benefits and potential risks of the study and the discomfort it may entail" and should give consent to participate.

Consent to Participate

The protection of a patient's right to privacy is essential and Ethics approval must be sought for research involving human participants. Authors are required to describe in their manuscripts ethics committee approval and participants consent by study design from participants when research involves human participants. Please collect and keep copies of patients' consent forms on which patients or other subjects of your experiments clearly grant permission for the publication of photographs or other material that might identify them. If the consent form for your research did not specifically include this, please obtain it or remove the identifying material. A statement to the effect that such consent had been obtained must be included in the 'Methods' section of your paper. If necessary the individual journal Editor(s) may request a copy of any consent forms.

For all research involving human participants that include details, images, videos, biomedical, clinical, and biometric data relating to an individual person, written informed consent for the publication of these details must be obtained from that person (or their parent or legal guardian in the case of children under 18), and a statement to this effect should appear in the manuscript. The manuscript must include a statement that written informed consent for publication was obtained. Authors can use the consent form to obtain consent for publication, or a consent form from their own institution or region if appropriate. The consent form must state that the details/images/videos will be freely available on the internet and may be seen by the general public. The consent form must be made available to the Editor if requested, and will be treated confidentially.

Ethics Committee Approval

All articles dealing with original human or animal data must include a statement on ethics approval in the Materials and Methods section reporting of ethics committee approval and patient consent by study design. This paragraph must contain the name and address of the ethics committee responsible; the protocol name and number of approving committee that was attributed by this ethics committee; the name of the Chairperson of the ethics committee (or the person who approved the protocol), the date of approval by the ethics committee, type of consent, data source, and whether the study used data collected as part of a study reported elsewhere were recorded.

Example of citation of Ethics committee approval in the Materials and Methods section: This research has been granted the ethics committee approval for Human or Animal sample use as follow: Ethics: Ethical approval for this study (Ethical Committee N° XXXXX) was provided by the Ethical Committee of (Name of University or Hospital Committee, City, Country) (Chairperson – Full Name of the responsible for authorizing the experiment -) on (Date – day, Month, Year).

Definition of Research Participant

A 'participant' is someone who actively provides research data. For example: Completes surveys; Participates in interviews, discussions or observations; Undergoes psychological, physiological or medical treatment or testing; Tests software; Grants access to personal collections of records, photographs; Is the person from whom tissue has been collected (including blood, urine, saliva, hair); Is identified in a record, e.g., employment record, medical record, education record, membership list, electoral roll; Is identified or de-identified in data banks or unpublished human research data, e.g., analysis of existing unpublished data collected by another researcher or collected for a different research project.

RESEARCH INVOLVING ANIMALS

Authors must describe in their manuscripts the Animal Ethics Committee approval when the study is carried out using animals. Experimental research on vertebrates or any regulated invertebrates must comply with institutional, national, or international guidelines, and where available, should have been approved by an appropriate ethics committee. Field studies and other non-experimental research on animals must comply with institutional, national, or international guidelines, and where available, an appropriate ethics committee should have been approved. A statement detailing compliance with relevant guidelines and/or appropriate permissions or licences must be included in the manuscript.

The Basel Declaration outlines fundamental principles to adhere to when conducting research in animals following the International Council for Laboratory Animal Science (ICLAS) and the Brazilian Conselho Nacional de Controle de Experimentação Animal (CONCEA) ethical guidelines.

A statement detailing compliance with relevant guidelines and/or ethical approval (including the name of the ethics committee and the reference number where appropriate) must be included in the manuscript. Suppose a study has been granted an exemption from requiring ethics approval. In that case, this should also be detailed in the manuscript (including the name of the ethics committee that granted the exemption and the reasons for the exemption). The Editor will take account of animal welfare issues and reserves the right to reject a manuscript, especially if the research involves protocols inconsistent with commonly accepted norms of animal research. In rare cases, the Editor may contact the ethics committee for further information. For experimental studies involving client-owned animals, authors must also document informed consent from the client or owner and adherence to a high standard (best practice) of veterinary care.

Animal Ethics Committees (A.E.C.s)

Animal Ethics Committees (A.E.C.s) provide avenues for public participation in the regulation of animal research. A.E.C.s are responsible for approving and monitoring research within Accredited Animal Research Establishments, including carrying out inspections of animals and facilities.

No animal research may be carried out without A.E.C. approval. A.E.C.s must consider and evaluate applications to conduct research on the basis of the researchers' responses to a comprehensive set of questions, including their justification for the research, its likely impact on the animals, and procedures for preventing or alleviating pain and distress.

On behalf of the establishment, A.E.C.s can stop inappropriate research and discipline researchers by withdrawing their research approvals. They can require that adequate care, including emergency care, is provided for animals. They also provide guidance and support to researchers on matters relevant to animal welfare through the preparation of guidelines and disseminating relevant scientific literature. A.E.C.s are responsible for advising establishments on the changes to physical facilities that should be made to provide for the needs of the animals used.

Ethics Committee Approval Format

This research has been granted the ethics committee approval for Human or Animal sample use as follow:

Ethics: Ethical approval for this study (Ethical Committee N° XXXXX) was provided by the Ethical Committee of (Name of University or Hospital Committee, City, Country) (Chairperson – Full Name of the responsible for authorizing the experiment -) on (Date – day, Month, Year).

Peer Review Process

All submissions to the SOUTHERN JOURNAL OF SCIENCES are assessed by an Editor, who will decide whether they are suitable for peer-review. All research articles undergo thorough double-blind peer-review. This usually involves a review by two independent peer reviewers. The practice of peer-review is to ensure that only good science is published. It is an objective process at the heart of good scholarly publishing and is carried out by all reputable scientific journals.

Initial Manuscript Evaluation

The Editor first evaluates all manuscripts to check their suitability to the AIM and SCOPE of the Journal apart from critical issues like Plagiarism and Citation manipulation. It is rare, but an exceptional manuscript can be accepted at this stage. Manuscripts rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the journal's aims and scope. Those that meet the minimum criteria are normally passed on to at least 2 experts for review.

Type of Peer-Review

The SOUTHERN JOURNAL OF SCIENCES employs double-blind peer-reviewing, where both the referee and author remain anonymous throughout the process.

Referee's Report Form

Referees are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript is original; methodologically sound; follows appropriate ethical guidelines; has results clearly presented and supports the conclusions, correctly references previous relevant work. Language correction is not part of the peer-review process, but referees may, if so wish, suggest modifications to the manuscript.

Review Timeline

The review processing time might take up to 150 days from the date of receiving the paper. Should the referee's reports contradict one another or a report is unnecessarily delayed, a further expert opinion will be sought. The Editor's decision will be sent to the author with recommendations made by the referees, which usually includes verbatim comments by the referees. Revised manuscripts might be returned to the initial referees, who may then request another revision of a manuscript.

Final Report

A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author and any recommendations made by the referees and may include verbatim comments by the referees.

Editor's Decision

Referees advise the editor, who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article. The Editor's decision is final.

Responsibilities

Editors' Responsibilities

Publication decisions: The editor is responsible for deciding which of the papers submitted to the journal will be published. The editor will evaluate manuscripts without regard to the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy. The decision will be based on the paper's importance, originality and clarity, and the study's validity and its relevance to the journal's scope. Current legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism should also be considered.

Confidentiality: The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest: Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted paper will not be used by the editor or the members of the editorial board for their own research purposes without the author's explicit written consent.

Acknowledgement of sources: Editors should use appropriate software to identify cases in which relevant published work referred to in the paper has not been cited in the reference section. The results of the software analysis should point out whether observations or arguments derived from other publications are accompanied by the respective source. The Editors will notify the author of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have taken knowledge.

Reviewers' Responsibilities

Contribution to editorial decisions: The peer-reviewing process assists the editor and the editorial board in making editorial decisions and may also serve the author in improving the paper.

Promptness: Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and withdraw from the review process.

Confidentiality: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be disclosed to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of sources: Reviewers should identify cases in which relevant published work referred to in the paper has not been cited in the reference section. They should point out whether observations or arguments derived from other publications are accompanied by the respective source. Reviewers will notify the editor of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and conflict of interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the papers.

Authors' Responsibilities

Reporting standards: Authors of original research reports should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Data access and retention: Authors could be asked to provide the raw data of their study together with the paper for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if practicable. In any event, authors should ensure accessibility of such data to other competent professionals for at least ten years after publication (preferably via an institutional or subject-based data repository or other data center), provided that the confidentiality of the participants can be protected and legal rights concerning proprietary data do not preclude their release.

Originality, plagiarism and acknowledgement of sources: Authors will submit only entirely original works, and will appropriately cite or quote the work and/or words of others. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work should also be cited.

Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication: In general, papers describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal. Submitting the same paper to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Manuscripts which have been published as copyrighted material elsewhere cannot be submitted. In addition, manuscripts under review by the journal should not be resubmitted to copyrighted publications. However, by submitting a manuscript, the author(s) retain the rights to the published material. In case of publication, they permit the use of their work under a CC-BY license [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/], which allows others to copy, distribute and transmit the work as well as to adapt the work and to make commercial use of it.

Authorship of the paper: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author ensures that all contributing co-authors and no uninvolved persons are included in the author list. The corresponding author will also verify that all co-authors have approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest: All authors should include a statement disclosing any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that may be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental errors in published works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and to cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper in the form of an erratum.

Publication Malpractice Statement

The Southern Journal of Sciences is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics. We do not tolerate plagiarism, data fabrication, or falsification. Authors, reviewers, and editors must adhere to ethical guidelines to ensure the integrity of the publication process. Any suspected violations, including duplicate submissions or conflicts of interest, will be investigated, and appropriate actions will be taken, including retraction of articles or reporting to relevant institutions.

Plagiarism

The SOUTHERN JOURNAL OF SCIENCES considers plagiarism a serious offense. Articles are screened for plagiarism before, during, and after publication, and if found, they will be rejected at any stage of processing. The journal employs appropriate software to identify cases where published work has not been properly cited or where content has been inappropriately duplicated.

Citation Manipulation

The SOUTHERN JOURNAL OF SCIENCES has a strict policy regarding citation integrity:

  • The SOUTHERN JOURNAL OF SCIENCES has a strict policy for fake references. All references will be checked before, during, and after publication.
  • References should be appropriate, reasonably recent, and from credible sources.
  • Excessive self-citation and citation manipulation are inappropriate behaviors.

Duplicate Submissions

The SOUTHERN JOURNAL OF SCIENCES does not accept duplicate submissions. This includes submissions of manuscripts derived from the same data and submission of the same manuscript in different languages. Furthermore, manuscripts which have been published as copyrighted material elsewhere cannot be submitted, and manuscripts under review by the journal should not be resubmitted to copyrighted publications.

Research Misconduct

Research misconduct includes fabrication, manipulation, or falsification of data. All research involving humans (including human data and human material) and animals must have been carried out within an appropriate ethical framework. If there is suspicion that research has not taken place within an appropriate ethical framework, the Editor may reject a manuscript and may inform third parties, for example, author(s)' institution(s) and ethics committee(s). In cases of proven research misconduct involving published articles, or where the scientific integrity of the article is significantly undermined, articles may be retracted. The journal will follow COPE guidelines in handling such cases.

Corrections and Retractions

The SOUTHERN JOURNAL OF SCIENCES applies Committee on Publication Ethics guidelines on corrections, retractions, and expressions of concern. Errors in published papers may require a correction in the form of an erratum. Because articles can be read and cited as soon as they are published, any changes after that could potentially impact those who read and cited the earlier version. Publishing an erratum increases the likelihood readers will find out about the change and explains the change's specifics. Errata is published on a numbered page and will contain the original article's citation.

Where substantial doubt arises as to the honesty or integrity of a submitted or published article, the Editor-in-Chief may choose to publish an expression of concern over aspects of the conduct or integrity of the work. For retraction cases, a note titled "Retraction: [article title]" is published in the paginated part of the journal's subsequent issue, and the original article receives a watermark indicating it has been retracted.

Article Removal

Articles may be removed from the online database in extremely limited cases. This will only occur where the article is defamatory or infringes others' legal rights, or where the article is, or we have good reason to expect it will be, the subject of a court order, or where the article, if acted upon, might pose a serious health risk. In these circumstances, while the metadata (Title and Authors) will be retained, the text will be replaced with a screen indicating the article has been removed for legal reasons.