|
Submission of manuscripts:
Articles should be sent for submission, exclusively through Scielo Submission, the link to which is on the initial page of cadernos pagu on Scielo - www.scielo.br/cpa
Form and preparation of manuscripts
The articles must never have been published. Articles that have been submitted to other periodicals will not be considered.
The manuscripts should be anonymous. References to theses, articles and institutional affiliation of the authors cannot be included in the body of the text or in the bibliographic references.
The articles should have up to 9,000 words or 45,000 characters (with spaces), including abstract (with up to seven lines), keywords [up to five] and title, all in both Portuguese and English. Book reviews should be up to 2,500 words and should not have an abstract.
cadernos pagu accepts articles written by a maximum of three authors. Articles with four or more authors will be rejected at the beginning of the submission process.
Images and or figures should be sent in jpeg or tiff formats, resolution 300 dpi. The author is responsible for the copyrights.
The titles of books and journals mentioned in the body of the text must be in italics, as well as foreign words. Emphases by the author should be in bold.
Norms for footnotes and bibliographic references should follow the instructions below at the time the manuscript is first submitted.
FOOTNOTES
Footnotes should be consecutively numbered at the end of each page, and include only commentaries. References to authors must be highlighted in the body of the text, using the following guideline: author’s last name, year of publication, colon, page (Strathern, 2006:25-26). Works published in the same year should be distinguished by letters of the alphabet (1988a - 1988b).
BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES
Bibliographic references must be cited at the end of the article (book review, document, interview), and obey the following criteria:
BOOK - author’s last name, author’s first name. Book title [italics]. Location of publication, publisher, date, number of pages. [STRATHERN, Marliyn. O gênero da dádiva: problemas com as mulheres e problemas com a sociedade na Melanésia. Campinas-SP, Editora da Unicamp, 2006 (1988)].
BOOK CHAPTER - author’s last name, author’s first name. Title of chapter (not in quotes). In: author’s last name, author’s first name. Book title (italics). Location of publication, publisher, date, pages. [ALGRANTI, Leila Mezan. Conventos e recolhimentos em Portugal e na América portuguesa: um estudo comparativo sobre instituições de reclusão feminina (séculos XVII e XVIII). In: COVA, Anne; RAMOS, Natália e JOAQUIM, Teresa. (orgs.) Desafios da Comparação: Família, mulheres e gênero em Portugal e Brasil. Oeiras, Celta, 2004, pp.65-88.]
ARTICLES IN JOURNALS - author’s last name, author’s first name. Title of article (not in quotes). Name of journal (italics). Location of publication, date, pages. [CORRÊA, Mariza. Trampas do Traje. cadernos pagu (22), Campinas-SP, Núcleo de Estudos de Gênero-Pagu/Unicamp, 2004, pp.185-200.]
DISSERTATIONS AND THESES - author’s last name, author’s first name. Title of dissertation or thesis (no italics). Field, university, date. [ALBUQUERQUE, Maria Elisa Vercesi de. Publicidade na TV: o fenômeno da longevidade do garoto Bombril. Dissertação de mestrado, Sociologia, Unicamp, 2000.]
DIGITAL PUBLICATIONS – follow the criteria above and add the web address and date of last access. [PISCITELLI, Adriana. On Gringos and Natives, gender and sexuality in the context of international sex tourism. Vibrant - Virtual BrazilianAnthropology, ano 1, n°1, Brasília, 2004 [http://seer.cfh.ufsc.br/index.php/vibrant/article/viewArticle/241–acesso em 20 ago 2013].
Editorial Process cadernos pagu
EDITORIAL STAFF:
Editors
Executive editor
Pagu Secretary
Pagu Librarian
Interns
BAS-SAE 1 ad 2 grantees (Intern Supervisor – Editor)
Editorial Committee
1. First evaluation. Participants: editors, interns, and editorial committee
When an article is submitted to the ScIELO platform, the editor and interns determine if the manuscript complies with the journal’s norms, and if it has potential for publication.
If the article does not comply with the journal’s norms, the submission is rejected. The message that explains the reason for the rejection (based on an existing model) must be clear – indicating that the article was rejected because it does not comply with the journal norms – and mention that the authors should adjust the text to comply with the norms and resubmit it.
If it is determined that the text does not have potential for publication, the manuscript is immediately rejected with a brief message signed by the editorial committee. If there is any doubt, the article is sent to members of the editorial committee, who come to serve as guest editors on the
ScIELO platform, specifically for articles that were designated to them. When asked to participate in this first step, members of the editorial committee should evaluate the article’s potential for publication. If they believe that the manuscript sent to them does NOT have potential for publication, the members of the editorial committee contacted must issue a brief statement [one paragraph] rejecting the article. If they understand that the text DOES have potential for publication, the guest editors should suggest at least three ad hoc reviewers who have PhDs. The indication should include, whenever possible, an e-mail for contacting the reviewers named. When designated for Step 1 in the Editorial Process the members of the editorial committee should respond to the request within 10 (ten) days.
2. Step to verify plagiarism. Partiicpants: editors and interns
The articles submitted to cadernos pagu that pass the first step of evaluation (described above) will be sent to the Turnitin antiplagiarism system, which is provided by the Sistema Único de Bibliotecas da Unicamp [administered by the State University at Campinas library]. If a score equal or higher than 26% of similarity with the database provided by the system is found, not considering text within quotation marks and publications by the author of the article being verified, the manuscripts will be rejected.
If there is a need to reject the article, the editor will undertake the rejection process via the ScIELO system by sending a report to the author.
If plagiarism is not found, the executive editor will send the manuscript to the ad hoc reviewers indicated in Step 1.
3. Step of accompaniment. Participants in the step: Executive editor, editors and editorial committee:
After Steps I and II of the Editorial Process, the articles are sent by the editor to the executive editor who should determine if they correspond to an article of a dossier, resubmissions or new submissions (based on information contained in the comment field and metadata of the submissions). In case of articles for a dossier, the executive editor should notify the guest editors/organizers of the dossier. In the case of new submissions of articles previously considered and rejected with the option for resubmission, the editorial assistant should notify the editor, who will make an editorial decision in conjunction with the editorial committee, based on the evaluations previously issued under blind review.
4. Step of evaluation and accompaniment. Participants in the step: Executive editor and interns:
In this step, the manuscripts will be sent by the executive editor and by the interns to the reviewers indicated by the editor, and by the editorial committee.
The executive editor is responsible for:
4.1 Finding the e-mails, completing a registration form, and verifying the curriculum of the designated reviewers and communicating with them. Problems identified by the editorial assistant in relation to the reviewers indicated should be informed to the editors.
4.2 Accompaniment of the evaluation process by the reviewers.
4.2.1 The editorial assistant will accompany the period of response of the reviewers and issue reminders of delays. The editor should be warned after 2 (two) unsuccessful attempts to communicate with the reviewers indicated.
4.2.2 If the reviewers indicated do not agree to conduct the evaluation, the executive editor should request that the reviewers indicate other reviewers who have PhDs. If the executive editor does not have a response within one week, she should inform the editor, who will designate new reviewers, along with the editorial committee.
4.2.3 The editor will be informed when reviews of the article have been received.
5. Final evaluation step. Participants: editor and executive editor:
After the article has received the reviews by the ad hoc reviewers, the editor reads the reviews and issues the Final Editorial Decision, which is placed in the system with a copy for the editorial assistant. It is the attribution of the executive editor to send the Editorial Decision to the authors.
6. Details of the final evaluation step. Participants: editors; executive editor and BAS 2 intern
6.1 In case of approval: if it is determined that the author should make changes to the article (whether substantive or not), the article should be returned to the author who will have a period of 30 days to submit the revised versions on the ScIELO platform, with the changes highlighted in yellow. The message to the author will highlight that the article should not be sent as a new submission, but that the text must be returned with the changes through the ScIELO system within the same submission process first created for the article. Monitoring of the deadline for return of the articles is the responsibility of the executive editor. The executive editor will report to the editor if a deadline for returning a text is not met, or when the revised version is received.
6.2 The revised article returned will be sent to the editor who will approve the final version of the manuscript or send it to a second round of evaluation. In this case, the articles will be sent to one of the ad hoc reviewers designated in the first round. Articles that were not returned within 30 days will be rejected with a previous warning to the authors made by the executive editor.
6.3 After approval of the article in the second round, the executive editor should ask the authors if they want to publish the text in English as well, clarifying that the costs of translation, to be done by professionals indicated by the journal, will be paid for by the authors.
6.4 The executive editor will send the abstract and resumen of articles accepted for publication for copyediting by the translators used by the journal. Payments for these services will be handled by the secretary for the Núcleo.
6.5 Articles that are rejected in this final step of the editorial procedures will be archived by the executive editor.
7. Layout Step. Participants: editorial assistant and 2-BAS grantee:
The articles ACCEPTED for publication will be sent by the executive editor to Grantee 2 who will layout the texts and a new review of the manuscript will be conducted to determine if it complies with the journal’s norms. In this step, special attention will be given to the Resumo and Bibliographic References.
After layout and verification of norms by grantee 2, the executive editor will conduct a second review, considering the layout and compliance with the journal’s norms (resumo, bibliographic references, quotes; ORCID, and other elements that go beyond text review).
8. Review of the texts – Participants: editorial assistant and editor:
After the layout, the article must be sent by the executive editor to the editor who will conduct the final review of the layout and norms, and conduct a final editing of the text. The article will be returned to the authors with the suggestions for changes made by the editor, and for compliance with norms made by the executive editor. The author will make the adjustments required for publication of the text. After the author returns the article, the editorial assistant will send it to the editor who will determine if it is ready to be sent for publication.
9. Step of sending articles to the company that conducts XML markup. Participant: executive editor:
The texts approved by the editor for XML markup will be sent to the Cabo Verde company by the executive editor, who will also be responsible for resolving any inconsistencies with the company.
-
The editors are responsible for accompanying and working with the indexes used by the journal – data qualis and h5 of Google Scholar, for example. The librarian of the Núcleo de Estudos de Gênero - Pagu will assist the editors in this activity.
-
The secretary of the Núcleo de Estudos de Gênero – Pagu is responsible for managing the journal’s funds, and for making the payments and simple updates to the journal page on the website of the Núcleo.
-
The BAS-1 grantee is responsible for administering publications about the journal on the website of the Núcleo de Estudos de Gênero Pagu, and on its social networks (of the Núcleo and of the Biblioteca Beth Lobo).
-
The editors can consult editorial committee members in case of doubts and problems that may arise during the editorial process. The members of the editorial committee should meet regularly once a month to discuss related issues and evaluate possible submissions.
|
