Peer review process

Peer review process

The articles received in the submission of the Geopauta journal will undergo a technical review. Before being sent for evaluation and, in this case, they may be rejected in this first stage of submission. To ensure the integrity of the blind peer review, all possible care must be taken not to reveal the identity of authors and reviewers to each other during the process. Thus: Authors should exclude the names of the text replacing by “author” and year in notes, article titles in parts of the text content. The identification of the authors must be removed from the properties of the Word document (in the menu File>Properties), starting in File, in the main menu, clicking in the sequence: File>Save as...>Tools, Save.
First, a careful analysis of the article will be carried out by the editorial board of the magazine, observing the relevance of the theme, the general technical norms of the Magazine exposed in the scope of article submission; in the magazine's template, followed by a rigorous evaluation of Geopauta's editorial standards. The evaluation of the article will be based on the originality, scientific relevance, correctness, clarity and graphic quality of the illustrations, among others.
Subsequently, the articles approved in this first stage will be sent for evaluation by external reviewers or the scientific council of the journal chosen in the double-blind system by specialty and/or affinity to the subject of the works to be appreciated, such works can be evaluated and re-evaluated according to the need indicated in each opinion and according to the referrals of the journal's editorial committee.
The journal provides an evaluation form that will be sent to the ad hoc reviewers. The opinions may be recommended for publication, recommended with mandatory correction/revision of the text or not recommended for publication. In the case of an article with a non-recommended review, it may be forwarded for evaluation at a later stage if it is deemed relevant by the editorial committee for the journal's publication themes.
Works received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must register the declaration of conflict of interest, available in the evaluation form. They must also maintain the confidentiality of any information provided by the editor or author, without retaining any copies of the manuscript. They should not use information or ideas obtained in reading the works for their own benefit.
After sending the opinions, the authors will be informed of the editorial decision. If changes are requested, the authors must pay attention to the deadlines established for sending the corrected version of the article. The article will only be published upon submission of corrections and/or justifications for non-alteration and in this case it is up to the editorial committee to decide on the reassessment of the article for publication or not. The editorial committee will forward to the author(s) the changes received in the opinion, the referees can propose correction, deletion and or add excerpts and sections, point out ambiguous, redundant, incoherent descriptions or misuse of terminology and concepts, etc. The opinions have a consultative character, and the submission editor is responsible for the final decision on the publication of the article..

Preprints - review

If the author intends to publish in preprints format, we provide the form in accordance with the Open Science of SciELO and indicate, according to the Open Science statement, that files containing Research Data (codes, methods and other materials used and resulting from the research) be made available. in the manuscript itself or in an open online repository, and will be evaluated in this modality. In addition, we provide links to other public platforms, such as Preprints, Preprints SciELO, arqxiv, Psyarxiv, so that, if necessary, they can be discussed openly, before being published.
The author(s) who submit an article in the Scielo preprint and or in other public preprint platforms must indicate whether they want the article to be evaluated by Revista Geopauta. Geopauta journal will apply the steps described in the Geopauta peer review criteria section, so if the article submitted in the preprint system has reached the minimum conditions of the journal, it will be forwarded to the editorial committee for an opinion. At this stage of the evaluation, the referee must indicate whether or not he agrees with the disclosure of the name in the opinion, if so, the opinion must be signed by the referee whose name will be disclosed in the preprint system.