Bakhtiniana Adopts Open Science

EDITORIAL

Bakhtiniana Adopts Open Science / Bakhtiniana adere à Ciência Aberta

In essence, a scientific work never ends: one work takes up where the other leaves off. Science is an endless unity.¹

Pavel N. Medviédev

Open science is science with a human face.²

Frank Miedema

Open Science aims at a significant transformation essentially enriching the traditional modus operandi to sponsor, project, conduct and, particularly, communicate research. The goal is to privilege the collaborative nature of research and democratize the access and the use of scientific knowledge.³

Abel L. Packer and Solange Santos

This Editorial,⁴ as well as this issue, presents very specific and important characteristics: it not only presents the published articles but also marks the effective adoption of Open Science by our journal, a new concept to produce and to communicate science that changes important aspects of the publishing work, from the authors’, the readers’, the reviewers’, and the editors’ perspective.

It is a fact that the day-to-day of scientific journals in Brazil, especially the ones focused on Linguistics and Literature, have slowly changed. Not too long ago, our object of absolute value were books signed by known Brazilian and foreign researchers. There were a few journals in the field, and they mostly published national research from a given institution,⁵ without considering the internationalization of Brazilian research.

We shall briefly retrace the history of Brazilian scientific journals in the field to provide a wider context to the moment when Bakhtiniana adopts Open Science by bringing here part of the experience of our Chief Editor, Beth Brait. Brait has recently evoked her personal history with journals in a conference at the Fórum de Editores da ANPOLL [Editor Forum for the National Association of Language and Literature Professors], entitled Qualified journals: daily life and survival:⁶

My speech is centered, as the title says, on the day-to-day of journal publication, which is a lot of work nowadays, as well as on the multiple difficulties of preserving the quality, not exactly concerning the articles, but the demands (Qualis, indexing, etc.) that clearly collide with the lack of funding (…).

To begin the discussion of these two aspects of the same reality, I will evoke my history with journals, not because it is an exceptional history, but because, in a way, it merges with the way our field sees and produces journals.

I started in the 1990s as part of the Editor Board for the print journal Língua e Literatura of the Languages and Literature Departments at Universidade de São Paulo. The Board was composed by myself, Flávio Aguiar, Iná Camargo Costa, Jorge Schwartz and Zenir Campos Reis, who is no longer among us. The journal published its first issue in 1972, which is available on-line, with great names from USP, including Leyla Perrone Moisés, Bóris Schnaiderman, Antonio Candido.

Afterwards, I moved on to the Revista da Anpoll,⁷ (...)

In the 1990s, when I joined Língua e Literatura, there were print volumes, as correctly stated by Abel Packer,⁸ the Director of the SciELO / FAPESP Program. Authors would send their articles – already through e-mails – and the board would select, review etc. This journal, which was supported by the Seção de Publicações [Publishing Section] at FFLCH/USP, in addition to being distributed to libraries, many times in systems of exchanges, was also sold and subscribed to.

Next, reflecting on the previous publishing work – of print journals, sold individually or by subscription – and on the current on-line journals, Brait discusses the difficulties in funding⁹ the issues and approaches her experience at Bakhtiniana claiming it goes against the current imaginary that online journals are free of costs:

Despite being an on-line journal, it costs the intellectual and manual work, as the other qualified journals and it costs money. Reviewing, formatting, XML. There are many people involved in all the stages necessary to publish a journal who are not, in general, specialized in editorial management, like university professors/researchers that volunteer to work.

Beth Brait, then, compares journals to books, which still hold a significant value in our field. Notwithstanding, she highlights one of the most important characteristics of journals: their access is faster. And not only that: if our first journals once preferred to publish national research from one particular institution, nowadays, they are seeking the internationalization of research conducted at specific institutions to underscore their contribution to scientific development in the world – which is fostered by bilingual Portuguese-English publications, for example. In terms of internationalization and visibility of scientific production, adopting Open Science, therefore, is very important.

Nonetheless, in these same passages, Beth Brait’s speech underscores yet another change in journals: the need to certify their quality through indexation. This matter greatly influenced the number of indexation services, which multiplied in the last few years, both for journals and for academic books. Since 1996/1997 we have basically counted on Qualis to certify the quality of scientific books and journals, but nowadays, there are several collections and on-line services. For a journal, it is important to be part of good collections, such as SciELO, because the impact factor of the journal and its articles as well as the bibliometrics data are measured through them.

It was precisely the Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO) that served as the main driver for Bakhtiniana to adopt Open Science. This great open access electronic library comprehends a selected collection of journals from 15 countries. In Brazil, SciELO is the result of a research project by FAPESP - Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (Foundation of Support to Research in the State of São Paulo) in partnership with BIREME - Latin American and Caribbean Center on Health Sciences Information. Since 2002, it has also received support from the CNPq, Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico [Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development]. The project envisages the development of a common methodology for the preparation, storage, dissemination, and evaluation of scientific literature in electronic format. As the project activities progress, new journal titles are continuously added to the library’s collection, while others face difficulties to remain in the collection for not meeting the criteria adopted.

One of SciELO’s main goals is precisely to contribute to the sustainable increase of the visibility and quality of journals by means of three principles: internationalization, professionalization and sustainability¹⁰ – despite acknowledging the difficulties and obstacles to the sustainable publication of many journals.¹¹

The SciELO’s indexation criteria¹² were updated in May 2020 and instructed all SciELO journals to update their editorial policies to align to Open Science practices by 2023. In the following, we present (i) the characteristics of Open Science; (ii) the steps Bakhtiniana has already taken to align to the concept. In the third part of this Editorial, we present (iii) the articles in this issue.

Open Science

Journals do essential work in the development of scientific research through the publication process, peer review and improvement of texts. According to Abel L. Packer, Director of SciELO/Brazil, they offer “sources of information and scientific evidence of support to public policies and informed decisions by professionals and citizens” (PACKER, A.L. et al., 2018).¹³ The FAPESP points out the importance of adopting Open Science: “based on the principle that outputs of the research financed by the Foundation are a public good and must be made public as soon as possible, while respecting the principles of scientific ethics, privacy and security, as well as protection of intellectual property,”¹⁴ thus making science more effective, trustworthy, accessible and relevant to society in general, as well as closer to people who can benefit from it. In the words of Packer and Mendonça (2021):

The goals of conducting and communicating research in the Open Science format have been defined and disseminated in the last few years:

• (a) Strengthening collaboration and sharing as the key for scientific research, consequently, increasing effectiveness and productivity of scientific endeavors;

• (b) Maximizing transparency of all processes; and,

• (c) Democratizing the scientific knowledge and the mechanisms of participation in scientific endeavor for social actors outside academia.¹⁵

In fact, since 2014, SciELO has guided journals to adopt Open Science as verified in the document “SciELO Brazil Criteria: criteria, policy and procedures for admission and permanence of scientific journals in the SciELO Brazil Collection,”¹⁶ thus gradually and persuasively leading editors to comply with the new publishing formats required by Open Science.

The main dimensions of Open Science are open access, open data, open research and innovation, citizen science.¹⁷ Nonetheless, we will discuss only a few of those aspects, following the SciELO guidelines and the preliminary adoption of Open Science by Bakhtiniana. The idea is not only to grant open access to articles and research data but a conception of transparency that involves the entire scientific work – despite each field’s specificities, we highlight the social participation, and the contribution science has to offer.

Regarding Open Access, Open Data and Open Sources

All data from a given research must be made available so any interested party can access them. They can be deposited in servers, such as SciELO’s, according to the theme, following the FAIR principles: findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable to categorize in the system (VELTEROP, J., 2021).¹⁸

In addition, to accelerate the publishing of research in continuous publication flow, SciELO highlights the possibility of preprint publication: “A preprint is defined as a manuscript ready for submission to a journal which is deposited on trusted preprint servers before or in parallel with submission to a journal.”¹⁹ They are novel articles with their own DOI that have not been through peer-review yet. The use of preprints is the author’s option; on the other hand, the journals must inform which preprint servers they recognize.

A preprint article allows the wide debate of its content. In pandemic times, for example, when the acceleration of researches, and their outputs implicated the lives of millions of people, preprints played a pivotal role as articles could receive criticism and/or recognition from other scientists in the field before their definitive publication.

During the submission of the article to a journal, authors must inform whether they have deposited the manuscript on a preprint server (recognized by the journal), but there is no need for journals to demand that articles be deposited beforehand. It is also important not to confuse preprint with ahead of print, which is the immediate publishing mechanism of an approved article. Among the servers already in use in Brazil, we cite two: SciELO and the Portal Multimodal/Multilíngue para o Avanço da Ciência Aberta nas Humanidades [Multimodal/Multilingual Portal to the Advance of Open Science in Humanities] being set up by the Applied Linguistics and Language Studies Graduate Program at PUC-SP, with support from the CNPq.

Regarding Open Peer-Review

Flaminio Squazzoni reminds us that peer-review²⁰ is “an essential part of the social infrastructure of research”:

(...) it is a collective effort to recognize and increase the value of manuscripts and, therefore, it is inherently “constructive.” It is simultaneously a context in which experts develop, adapt and impose evaluation standards, a way to connect and cooperate (directly and indirectly), a disciplined discourse mediated by experts (usually unrelated) in a “safe” environment (though often disorganized and ambiguous). Therefore, it is inherently “social.”²¹

SciELO makes three suggestions for the opening of peer review: the publication, at the end of the article, of the name or names of the editors responsible for the evaluation; the option of direct communication between referees and corresponding author with or without identification; and publishing the approval assessment reviews of articles with or without identifying the reviewers. Hence, reviews constitute “a new type of literature in the SciELO methodology and receive treatment like research articles. (…) In summary, the adoption of open science will improve the transparency, reusability and reproducibility of the research communicated by SciELO journals” (SciELO, 2020, pp.6-7).²²

Finally, regarding Open Science, it is noteworthy the initiative of the Portal Multimodal/Multilíngue para o Avanço da Ciência Aberta nas Humanidades²³ [Multimodal/Multilingual Portal to the Advance of Open Science in Humanities], an institutional project of the Applied Linguistics and Language Studies Graduate Program Graduate at PUC-SP, with support from CNPq through the Edital 25/2020. The Portal aims to provide content related to Open Sciences in Humanities, including verbal, visual, verbal-visual, and gestural-verbal data through which both national and international research can be conducted. The Portal is built upon four axes: open access, open data, open source, and citizen science/citizen humanities. The movement of opening science demands new attitudes and new practices, which the Portal aims to support, by conceiving this movement as ultimately responsible for the democratization of science.

3 Bakhtiniana and Open Science: An Experience in Progress

In this section, we highlight the changes Bakhtiniana has made to meet the Open Science criteria. In fact, the journal’s website was subjected to several changes: in About the journal; Aims and Scope; Author Guidelines – conditions for submission and processing of manuscripts; in Evaluation Form; Open Science Compliance Form; Evaluation request message; and the Peer-review process… Authors that have submitted articles in the last months, surely have noted these changes. We list some of these aspects found on-line²⁴:

About the Journals

Bakhtiniana. Revista de Estudos do Discurso adoption of Open Science comprehends:

• 1) Preprint as an option for authors to formally begin the communication of their research (…)

• 2) Transparent management of research data and making available the code of programs and other materials pertaining to the articles (…)

• 3) Options for opening the peer-review process to be accepted by authors and/or reviewers.

Changes in Author Guidelines

Submissions to peer-reviewed sections (for example, articles) follow the guidelines informed in Blind peer-review, except for articles available on the SciELO preprints server or those who choose open review (informed in the Open Science Compliance Form).

Authors are aware that not following the guidelines leaves their manuscript at risk of being rejected at any time of the evaluation process.

Changes in the Process: Open Science Compliance Form

In addition to the manuscript, authors must transfer the Open Science Compliance Form stating (1) whether the manuscript is a preprint; (2) the availability of the research data and other materials; and (3) how they want to open the journal peer review process: whether they agree with the publication of review reports of the approved manuscript; whether they agree to interact directly with reviewers responsible for evaluating the manuscript.

Changes in the peer-review evaluation form, to which it was added:

In the Evaluation form the reviewer fulfill, we added:

As the journal is adopting Open Science, do you agree with the publication of approval assessment reviews? Yes or no?

Do you agree to interact directly with the author of the manuscript? Yes or no?

We have already stated that this is the first issue of Bakhtiniana that adopts the model of Open Science. There are 08 articles and one review, but three of the articles were submitted in 2020, before the journal committed to Open Science; just the ones submitted after February 2021 have received the Open Science forms. The authors of these 05 articles agreed to interact with reviewers and with the publication of their reviews. Regarding the reviewers (2 or 3 for each article) there was no unanimity: 4 agreed to interact with authors, 4 did not; 6 agreed to have their approval assessment published and 3 did not.

There is still room for tension since the new format expands the interlocutors in the review process and changes the established academic culture: a) for authors, there is the insecurity of seeing their deficiencies exposed to those who wish to read it; b) for reviewers, there is a new audience to legitimate their assessment who can see other qualities and/or deficiencies in the texts. Our present evaluation is that Open Science certainly proposes the dialogue and the widening of collaborative scientific production, and, like every paradigm shift, there can be censorship or boycott from the established order. Even so, we have hopes that the good scientific practices proposed by Open Science will allow greater involvement of researchers in the scientific production, which can increase the quality of works.

4 Bakhtiniana 17.1. The Texts

This issue has a peculiar characteristic: there is a large number of articles that propose theoretical reflections, most of which of excellent quality. We begin these reflections with “The Properties of Word, the Prerogative of Language: Specificities and Primacy of Language in Vološinov and Benveniste,” signed by Valdir do Nascimento Flores (UFRGS), Carlos Alberto Faraco (UFPR) and Filipe Almeida Gomes (PUC-PG). Relying on an in-depth reading of the words of Valentin N. Voloshinov and Émile Benveniste and establishing a dialogue between to understand the “peculiarities of the word” and the “privilege of language,” the authors defend the preeminence of verbal language ahead of other semiosis, resuming the internal and external specificities of language. Finally, by underscoring the importance of this understanding to discuss the teaching Portuguese at school, the authors lead the reader to reflect more carefully on the theoretical fabric weaved throughout their text.

The following article is by Verônica Franciele Seidel (PUC-RS), entitled “From Singularity to Polyphony: A Re-Reading Proposal of the Bakhtinian Theory.” The author resumes the claim that, in the Bakhtinian, all concepts are inter-related in order to read two works of Mikhail Bakhtin: Toward a philosophy of the act and Problems of Dostoevsky’s poetics; then, she seeks the relationships between the artistic construction of the polyphonic novel and the acknowledgement of the singularity of each subject.

In the next article, the theoretical reflections of Émile Benveniste support the debate on Allen Ginsberg’s Howl. Daiane Neumann (Universidade Federal de Pelotas – UFPEL) signs “Ginsberg’s Howl: Language on Trial.” The discussion on language, what can and cannot be said according to the impositions of a society, was raised in the trial that judged both the author and his work in 1957 in the United States; they are discussed in the light of reflections and annotations proposed by the linguist Émile Benveniste and readers of his work, such as Gérard Dessons and Henri Meschonnic. Luiz Eduardo Mendes Batista (UFU) and Stefania Montes Henriques (UEMG), in “A Saussure-Bakhtin Encounter in the Episteme,” propose possible convergences between their work, especially regarding the notion of value.

The article “Intermediality and Intericonicity: A Possible Dialogue?” by João Kogawa, Ana Luiza Ramazzina-Ghirardi, Renato Nunes dos Santos – all from UNIFESP constitutes a watershed between theory and practice. On the grounds of a dense theoretical basis, the authors discuss the analysis of images in the discursive studies, through the concepts of intermediality and intericonicity. The analyses of different representations of the burial of Christ, from the Gospels (written Christian discourse) to the 16^th and 17^th centuries (pictorial Catholic discourse) and contemporary photography, show the heuristic power of the concepts discussed in the article.

The next article is a good example of internationalization of knowledge. The Russian authors Svetlana Yu. Pavlina and Maria I. Baranova, both from the Linguistics University of Nizhny Novgorod, Nizhny Novgorod (Russia) in the article “Embracing the Spirit of Carnival: the Grotesque and the Carnivalesque in Rolando Hinojosa’s Klail City Death Trip Series” discuss the work of a Mexican writer in a Brazilian journal. In the text, they focus on the carnival laughter and the grotesque in Hinojosa’s novel and the double nature of the comic characters who are at once destructive force and conveyors of truth.

In the next article, the Bakhtinian theory is once again evoked, this time by Heloisa Mara Mendes (UFU) and Marina Célia Mendonça (UNESP), who analyze “El País Editorials from a Dialogical Perspective.” Their goal of this reflection on how the genre editorial manifests in that newspaper is to discuss the dialogue established with the assumed reader and to understand the aspects of the text that guarantee the worldwide reach of the newspaper. Finally, Mário Messagi (UFPR), who signs “Fact vs. Text: How “Objectivity” Hides the Discursive Characteristic of Journalism,” highlights the pertinence of the discursive perspective in understanding journalism, remembering in Bakhtinian terms that this is a sphere that does not report the world directly but sources, information or texts of others, that is, discourse about discourse, language about language.

The last text of the issue is the review of the work “He’s Out of His Mind: The Popular Language of the Gospel of Mark” by Francisco Benedito Leite. Maria Helena Cruz Pistori (Post-doctoral at PUC-SP) introduces the rich interdisciplinary study that congregates the Sciences of Religion, Ernst Cassirer, literature and language theorists: the German philologist Erich Auerbach, the Canadian Northrop Frye, the Bakhtin’s Circle and the new rhetoric, calling out for the symbolic and religious terms that could eventually add valuable data to the understanding of the contemporary world.

Finally, once again, Bakhtiniana gathers an excellent collection of articles, submitted to rigorous selection, carried out by competent and collaborative reviewers of the editorial board and ad hoc. The novelty of the issue, the first of Bakhtniana committed to Open Science, relies on the reviews at the end of three out of the eight articles; it is important to know that the reviews share the same article’s DOI.

Writing this text, however, with so many excerpts from blogs, posts and on-line texts, we once again are reminded of Medvedev in his 1928 work:

New means of representation force us to see new aspects of visible reality, but these new aspects cannot clarify or significantly enter our horizon if the new means necessary to consolidate them are lacking (2012, p.199).²⁵

It is like that: the scientific work is endless, that is, one work takes up where the other leaves off. Hence, we invite everyone – readers, authors, and collaborators – to actively respond to these texts, to relish this issue and include this set of articles in their research, giving Bakhtiniana the opportunity to actively participate in Brazilian and international cultural and academic life. As readers can see, this issue brings together fourteen Brazilian researchers from eleven different universities (UFRGS, UFPR, PUC-MG, PUC-RS, UFPEL, UFU, UEMG, UNIFESP, UFU, UNESP, PUC-SP) and two researchers from a Russian university (Linguistics University of Nizhny Novgorod).

Our gratitude, once again, goes to the constant and important support, assistance, and recognition of the Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo (PUC-SP), São Paulo, Brazil, which, through the Plano de Incentivo à Pesquisa (PIPEq)/Publicação de Periódicos (PubPer-PUCSP) [Research Incentive Plan (PIPEq)/Publication of Periodicals (PubPer-PUCSP) –2021], Solicitação [Request]18.937.

• 1
  BAKHTIN, M. M.; MEDVEDEV, P. N. The Formal Method in Literary Scholarship: A Critical Introduction to Sociological Poetics. Translated by Albert Wehrle. London: The John Hopkins University Press, 1978, p.129.
• 2
  Available at: https://narratives.insidehighered.com/four-pillars-of-open-science/index.html. Access on 14-10-2021.
• 3
  In the original: “A Ciência Aberta pleiteia uma transformação considerável essencialmente enriquecedora do tradicional modus operandi de fomentar, projetar, realizar e, particularmente, comunicar pesquisa. O objetivo é privilegiar a natureza colaborativa da pesquisa e democratizar o acesso e uso do conhecimento científico”. PACKER, A.L.; SANTOS, S. Ciência aberta e o novo modus operandi de comunicar pesquisa – Parte I [online]. SciELO em Perspectiva, 2019 Available at: https://blog.SciELO.org/blog/2019/08/01/ciencia-aberta-e-o-novo-modus-operandi-de-comunicar-pesquisa-parte-i/. Access on 13-10-2021.
• 4
  Considering the great number of online citations in the text, we chose to reference them in the footnotes exclusively.
• 5
  See the note on the first issue of Língua e Literatura (1972): “This journal, which begins with annual issues, will publish the works of professors from the Departments of Literature and Languages of the Faculdade de Filosofia, Letras e Ciências Humanas at São Paulo University. It is also open to collaboration of all experts in the field” Available at: https://www.revistas.usp.br/linguaeliteratura/issue/view/8691. Access on 13-10-2021.
• 6
  In the original: “Periódicos qualificados: cotidiano e sobreviência”. Unfortunately, we have only found the calls for the conference: https://j.pucsp.br/agenda/periodicos-qualificados-cotidiano-e-sobrevivencia; https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSc6Lk90gFOXytVYA5xBB2SmwoXEs4khHCzU_GbxaVGz6t5i3g/closedform. Access on 14-10-2021.
• 7
  Revista da Anpoll. The first of many issues. Available at: https://revistadaanpoll.emnuvens.com.br/revista/issue/view/14. Access on 13-10-2021.
• 8
  Project Coordinator at the Fundação de Apoio à Universidade Federal de São Paulo, Director of the SciELO / FAPESP (Scientific Electronic Library Online), Former Director of BIREME - Latin American and Caribbean Center on Health Sciences Information at the Pan-American Health Organization (PAHO/WHO).
• 9
  On these issues (funding/sales/subscriptions of journals and the current Article Processing Charges – a fee charged to authors per issue by an increasing number of journals), it is noteworthy the observation made by Mendes (2019; our highlights): “College, Academic and University publishers charged less APC (224 dollars for DOAJ titles and 364 dollars for DOAJ Seals) or never charge them, whereas publishers for Societies and Institutes have statistically significant higher values of APC for DOAJ Seals (average of 1.143 dollars). (…) Nonetheless, in terms of concentration of titles, there is the hegemony and the oligopoly of commercial publishers, such as Springer and Elsevier, which charge per article.” MENDES, S. O. Periódicos Científicos em acesso aberto: uma análise do povoamento do Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ). Available at: https://repositorio.ufsc.br/bitstream/handle/123456789/204556/PCIN0202-T.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y. Access on: 14-10-2021.
• 10
  See SciELO 20 Anos – 26–28 Setembro 2018. Available at https://blog.SciELO.org/blog/2017/06/14/SciELO-20-anos-26-28-setembro-2018/#.YWc0kBDMKit. Access on: 14-10-2021.
• 11
  To give an idea of the importance and selectivity of the SciELO network in terms of excellency in the field of Literature, Language, Linguistics and Arts, we found 107 registers for A1 Qualis journals in Linguistics and Literature; 182 for A2; 26 registers for A1 Qualis journals in Arts and 73 for A2. Only 14 of the 288 journals belong to the SciELO network.
• 12
  SciELO Brazil Criteria. Available at: https://www.SciELO.br/about/criterios-SciELO-brasil. Access on 14-10-2021.
• 13
  See. SciELO pós 20 Anos: o futuro continua aberto. https://blog.SciELO.org/blog/2018/12/19/SciELO-pos-20-anos-o-futuro-continua-aberto/ Access on 06-02-2021.
• 14
  Open Science @ FAPESP. Available at: https://www.fapesp.br/openscience/. Access on 14-10-2021.
• 15
  PACKER, A.L.; MENDONÇA, A. O periódico Educação em Revista avalia somente preprints no modelo “publicar, depois revisar”. Available at: https://blog.SciELO.org/blog/2021/07/08/o-periodico-educacao-em-revista-avalia-somente-preprints-no-modelo-publicar-depois-revisar/#.YWdFmBDMJuU. Access on 13-10-2021.
• 16
  SciELO Brazil Criteria: Criteria, Policy and Procedures for Admission and Permanence of Scientific Journals in the SciELO Brazil Collection. Available at: https://wp.scielo.org/wp-content/uploads/20200500-Criteria-SciELO-Brazil-en.pdf. Access on 13-10-2021.
• 17
  In the FioCruz Virtual Campus course, it is defined: “Open science is the scientific activity practiced in an open, collaborative and transparent way in all fields of knowledge, from the fundamental sciences to the social sciences and humanities.” In addition to these, the course cites open source, open lab book, open educational resources and scientific social media. See Dimensões da ciência aberta. Source: https://mooc.campusvirtual.fiocruz.br/rea/ciencia-aberta/serie1/curso1/aula1.html. Access on: 14-10-2021.
• 18
  VELTEROP, J. Publishers e dados FAIR. Available at: https://blog.SciELO.org/blog/2021/01/20/publishers-e-dados-fair/#.YWdNphDMJuU. Access on 13-10-2021.
• 19
  PACKER, A. L.; SANTOS; S.; MENEGHINI, R. SciELO Preprints a caminho. Available at: https://blog.SciELO.org/blog/2017/02/22/SciELO-preprints-a-caminho/#.YWdPExDMJuU. Access on 13-10-2021.
• 20
  On this subject, we also highlight the reflections on our Editorial 15.4: Our Peer-Reviewers: Backstage of Scientific Production. Available at: https://www.scielo.br/j/bak/a/6QqrnRjTp4BL9XSqYSSXhBh/?lang=pt. Access on 14-10-2021.
• 21
  SQUAZZONI, F. Avaliação por pares não é apenas controle de qualidade, é parte integrante da infraestrutura social da pesquisa. [Originally published on the LSE Impact Blog in June 2019] https://blog.SciELO.org/blog/2020/01/15/avaliacao-por-pares-nao-e-apenas-controle-de-qualidade/#.YWdVNRDMJuV. Access on 14-10-2021.
• 22
  Criteria, Policy and Procedures for the Admission and Permanence of Journals in the SciELO Brazil Collection 2020. Available at: https://wp.SciELO.org/wp-content/uploads/20200500-Criterios-SciELO-Brasil.pdf. Access on 14-10-2021.
• 23
  Available at: http://cienciaaberta.org/. Access on 14-10-202.
• 24
  Available at: https://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/bakhtiniana/about. Access on 14-10-2021.
• 25
  For references, see footnote 1, p.134.
• Translated by Larissa de Pinho Cavalcanti – [e-mail]; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3087-1881

REFERÊNCIAS

• MEDVIÉDEV, P. N. O método formal nos estudos literários: introdução crítica a uma poética sociológica. Tradução Sheila Camargo Grillo e Ekaterina Vólkova Américo. São Paulo: Contexto, 2012.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  29 Nov 2021
• Date of issue
  Jan-Mar 2022