About the Journal

FOCUS, SCOPE, AND CRITERIA OF ORIGINALITY

The LUPAA Journal publishes works that present original contributions to the scientific field, aligned with the thematic scope defined on the journal's portal.

Manuscripts that are prioritized:

  • Present methodological clarity;

  • Demonstrate theoretical consistency;

  • Present relevant results;

  • Highlight dialog with updated literature.

Merely descriptive works without critical analysis or adequate foundation are not accepted.

PERIODICITY, CONTINUOUS FLOW, AND EDITING CLOSURE

The magazine is published semi-annually, with continuous publication within each issue.

The editorial closure occurs upon consolidation of a minimum number of approved and finalized works.

Manuscripts approved after the closing of an issue automatically move to the subsequent volume.

PEER REVIEW POLICY

Double-blind review for scientific articles, reviews, essays, and reports.

Objective Evaluation Criteria

The reviewers should consider:

  • Compliance with the scope;

  • Originality;

  • Methodological rigor;

  • Theoretical consistency;

  • Clarity and textual organization;

  • Bibliographic update;

  • Scientific contribution.

Editorial Decision

Based on the opinions, the decision may be:

  • Accept without changes;

  • Acceptance with mandatory revisions;

  • Submission to a new round of evaluation;

  • Justified rejection.

POLICY ON ETHICS AND SCIENTIFIC INTEGRITY

The journal adopts international principles of good editorial practices.

Practices such as the following are prohibited:

  • Plagiarism;

  • Unreferenced self-plagiarism;

  • Fabrication or manipulation of data;

  • Redundant publication;

  • Omission of conflicts of interest.

Proven cases may result in:

  • Immediate rejection;

  • Public retraction;

  • Formal institutional communication.

ANTI-PLAGIARISM POLICY

All manuscripts are submitted to similarity checking software.

High percentages of similarity, without adequate academic justification, will result in return or rejection.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY

Authors, reviewers, and editors must declare any potential conflict of a financial, institutional, or personal nature.

The declared conflict will be analyzed by the Editor-in-Chief to determine the appropriate course of action.

AUTHORSHIP POLICY

An author is considered to be someone who has significantly contributed to:

  • Conception and design of the research;

  • Analysis and interpretation of the data;

  • Writing or critical review of the manuscript;

  • Final approval of the published version.

Secondary contributions should be recorded in the acknowledgments section.

OPEN SCIENCE AND RESEARCH DATA

The magazine encourages:

  • Provision of data in reliable repositories;

  • Methodological transparency;

  • Indication of received funding.

POLICY OF EXOGENY AND DIVERSITY

To avoid institutional endogeneity:

  • At least 50% of the articles published per edition must be by authors external to IFS;

  • Regional, national, and international diversity is encouraged;

  • The Editorial Board must have a majority of external members.

INTERNATIONALIZATION

  • Title, abstract, and keywords must be in Englis;
  • Acceptance of manuscripts in Portuguese, Spanish, or English;

  • Encouragement of participation by foreign authors and reviewers.

SUBMISSION GUIDELINES

  • Unpublished manuscript;
  • ORCID mandatory for all authors;
  • Maximum of four authors per manuscript (unless technically justified);
  • Main file without identification;
  • Formatting according to the journal's guidelines;
  • References according to the current ABNT standards.

COPYRIGHT AND LICENSING

The authors retain the copyright.

The publication is under the Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license.

OPEN ACCESS AND FREE OF CHARGE

The LUPAA Journal does not charge submission or publication fees.

All content is made available for free.

INDEXING AND QUALIFICATION

The magazine is committed to:

  • Regularity of publication;
  • Assignment of DOI to all articles;
  • Standardization of metadata;
  • Institutional diversity;
  • Formalized peer review;
  • Transparency of editorial policies.