Editorial Team

Editor-in-Chief/Editor Manager

Edgar Bisset Alvarez - Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, SC, Brazil. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5388-5944
Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/6259487897392078 
E-mail: edgar.bisset@ufsc.br

Editors Section

Scientific Editorial Board

Copy editors

Layout reviewers and proofreaders

Catalogs

Editor-in-Chief/Editor Manager

Duties and Tasks

The editor-in-chief (or editor manager) is responsible for configuring and organizing the issues and publications, choosing the editorial team – emphasizing the exogeny of editors and reviewers –, editorial policies, content quality, and indexing on databases and directories of scientific journals. In addition to editing emails, forms, ethical and editorial guidelines, as well as all other information and decisions concerning the journal and the articles.

Either the editor-in-chief or the assistant editor can register editors, evaluators, authors, and other users in the journal system.

The assistant editor makes the editorial decisions along with the editor-in-chief to ensure the quality of the journal. In the absence of the editor-in-chief, the assistant editor is then responsible for such assignments. The assistant editor must have full knowledge of all editing steps, providing the editor-in-chief and the editorial committee with the information required for decision-making.

The editor-in-chief conducts the first reading of the article concerning the journal's scope and scientific rigor, followed by the assistant editor. Subsequently, the article is referred to the editor of the section for a second evaluation and selection of reviewers. 

Approved manuscripts return to the editor-in-chief and assistant editor for text editing, trial composition, final publication, DOI attribution, and indexing.

Section editors

Duties and tasks

The section editor is responsible for the preliminary evaluation of articles in their specific assigned areas, defining whether they will be referred to or not to the double-blind review process. The evaluation must be based on scientific criteria, emphasizing an endogeny level close to zero. Next, the section editor indicates and/or suggests the referees and monitors the articles throughout the editorial process until their approval or rejection. 

The editors must observe the schedule established for the scientific referral, authors’ review, and final decision, guaranteeing that the deadlines are met. If necessary, the deadlines should be extended upon agreement by the editor-in-chief.

The processes of preliminary manuscript reading, and selection of reviewers must not exceed seven days since the journal is committed to guaranteeing expedited processing to the authors.

All manuscripts are tracked throughout the editorial process by the section editor, who impartially makes the editorial recommendations to the editor-in-chief based on the reviewers’ decisions. The editor-in-chief is responsible for the final editorial decision. 

The section editor must guarantee that the process is part of a double-blind review system, which means verifying whether the authors and evaluators send their decisions or manuscripts without property identification. In this case, the editor must remove the properties from the file.

Section editor's choice of reviewer

The section editor must invite at least 4 (four) reviewers per submission, and at least 2 (two) of them must accept to participate in the manuscript evaluation. The evaluator’s (reviewer) choice must be based on the reviewer’s expertise on the manuscript content, preferably not belonging to the same institution as the authors and without having published with the group of authors in the last five years.

The decisions will return with one of the following recommendations: 

  • Required corrections: The document is returned to the author for consideration of notes and observations.
  • New submission for evaluation: The document is returned to the author for consideration of notes, evaluation, and submission of an updated version of the material for another evaluation round (double-blind review). 
  • Submission to another journal: The author is informed that the manuscript does not meet the conditions to be published in the journal.
  • Acceptance: The author is informed that the manuscript was accepted and will be referred directly to text editing, layout, and final production, without being subjected to the evaluation workflow.
  • Rejection:The author is informed that the manuscript was rejected, and the submission will be terminated.

The editor-in-chief or assistant editor must be called for a joint decision if the article is either accepted or rejected.

Subsequently, the accepted manuscript returns to the editor-in-chief or assistant editor for text editing, trial composition, and final publication.

Editorial Board

Duties and tasks

The members of the Editorial Council have an advisory role and might be called for decisions on manuscripts submitted for publication, as well as to act as a consultant in cases of doubts about ethical issues or diverging decisions by evaluators, controversial cases, issues of conflicts of interest, or other matters related to ethical and editorial policies.

All recommendations by the Editorial Council must be grounded on the ethical guidelines defined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the editorial and ethical policies of the PAG, the good practices of scientific publication, and the recommendations of the indexers of both the Journal and the Brazilian Association of Scientific Editors (ABEC).

In cases where a member of the Council is aware of the author’s identity, their recommendations must be made impartially.

Editorial Support

Duties and tasks

The editorial support team supports the tasks of configuration and layout, submission, verification of checklists, text editing, and proofreading, among other editorial tasks.

Editorial Workflow

Submission: Other submissions are assigned to the section editors and considered for the step of review.

Some manuscripts are considered inadequate and will not move to another step.

Review: The manuscripts are considered ready to be referred by the section editor for peer review.

Some submissions are not approved during review and will complete only the first step, whereas others require changes, are requested by the reviewers, and are referred to the authors for adjustments and then a second evaluation round, moving to the next step upon acceptance.

Text editing: The accepted articles are now improved by a text reviewer and the authors can review the text.

Publication: Once the copies are finished and approved, the submission moves to the publication phase. During the production, the copied files are trial-converted – HTML, XML, PDF, etc., and the author can review the trials once more. Upon the approval of all authors, the submission is scheduled for publication.