Editorial Code of Conduct

The Revista Direito e Sexualidade is committed to ethics and quality in its publication. We support standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in publishing in our journal: author, journal editor, reviewers, reviewers, and editor. We do not accept plagiarism or any other unethical behavior.

• Publication decision: The journal editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editor is guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and in strict compliance with legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may consult with the editorial board or collaborators in making decisions.

• Fair Rules: The editor must evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content, without distinction of race, sex, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, nationality, or the political philosophy of the authors.

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

• Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: The editor must not use unpublished information in their own investigation without the author's express written consent. The editor must refrain from evaluating manuscripts in which he has any conflict of interest resulting from competitive or collaborative relationships or any other type of relationship or connections with any of the authors, companies or (possibly) institutions that are linked/connected to the articles.

• Participation and cooperation in investigations: The editor must take reasonable response measures when ethical complaints have been raised in relation to a submitted manuscript or published article.

• Contribution to Editorial Decision: Peer review helps the editor make editorial decisions and through editorial communications with the author can also assist the author in improving the article.

• Punctuality: Any selected referee who does not feel qualified to evaluate research reported in a manuscript or knows that immediate review will be impossible should notify the editor and apologize for the review process.

• Confidentiality: All manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown or discussed with others.

• Standards of objectivity: Comments must be conducted objectively and evaluators must express their opinions clearly with supporting arguments.

• Source Acknowledgment: Peer reviewers should identify relevant published works that have not been cited by the authors. The reviewer should also draw the editor's attention to any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript in question and any other published document of which they are personally aware.

• Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Inside information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have any conflict of interest resulting from competitive or collaborative relationships or any other type of relationship or connections with any of the authors, companies or (possibly) institutions that are linked/connected to the articles.

• Reporting Standards: Authors of original research reports must provide an accurate account of the work performed, as well as an objective analysis of its significance. Underlying data must be accurately presented in the article. A document must contain enough detail and references to allow others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or intentionally inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

• Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that their works are fully original, and if authors have used other authors' work and/or words they must have been properly cited or quoted. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

• Multiple, redundant, or competing publications: An author should generally not publish manuscripts that essentially describe the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously and/or publishing the same article in different journals constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

• Source Acknowledgment: Proper acknowledgment of the work of others should always be done. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the work reported. Information obtained privately, such as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, should not be used or reported without the source's explicit written permission. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as arbitration manuscripts or grant applications, should not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in those services.

• Article Authorship: 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. Others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project should also be recognized or listed as contributors. The author must ensure that all suitable and no unsuitable co-authors are included in the article, and that all co-authors have viewed and approved the final version of the document and agreed to its submission for publication.

• Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors must disclose in their manuscripts any financial or substantive/material conflicts of interest that could lead to influence the results or interpretations in their manuscripts. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed.

• Fundamental Errors in Published Works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his or her own published work, it is the author's obligation to immediately notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the article.

We are committed to ensuring that funding from advertising, reprinting or other commercial income has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.

Our articles are reviewed to ensure the quality of scientific publications and we are also users of CrossCheck (CrossRef's plagiarism identification software).

* This Ethics Policy is based on recommendations from Elsevier and COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

* This statement is based on Elsevier recommendations and COPE's Best Practice for Guidelines Journal Editors.