Author Guidelines

MANUSCRIPT SUBMISSION GUIDELINES

The Brazilian Journal of Alternative Dispute Resolution – RBADR, published semiannually, is a journal concentrated on alternative dispute resolution (ADRs), namely Arbitration, Mediation, Dispute Board, ADR Designing Programs and Online Dispute Resolution, among other topics of interest.

THE JOURNAL

The Brazilian Journal of Alternative Dispute Resolution – RBADR is a double-blinded, peer-reviewed journal that publishes academic papers related to appropriate methods of conflict resolution. It is published by Fórum Publishers from Belo Horizonte, State of Minas Gerais and aims to provide a leading international forum for in-depth studies from various perspectives in ADRs.

MANUSCRIPT STRUCTURE

The Brazilian Journal of Alternative Dispute Resolution – RBADR invites authors to submit original manuscripts on all aspects of issues related to Alternative Dispute Resolution. It is assumed that submitting a manuscript to the RBADR signals that it has not been, and will not be, submitted elsewhere simultaneously. Papers scheduled for future publication in book form will be considered, provided they appear first in RBADR.

GENERAL GUIDELINES

Manuscripts should be written in Times New Roman, size 12, and space between lines 1.5 throughout the manuscript (including all quotations, footnotes, and references). Pages should be numbered consecutively. The average number of pages should be between 15 and 40 for papers and between 5 and 8 for book reviews and case comments. Notes should be listed consecutively during the text of the article (footnotes) and marked in the text at the point of punctuation by superior numbers. Manuscripts must be submitted in Word format (.doc). 

 FORMAT

Articles should be based on original research, and an actual argument that falls within the Journal's scope should be developed. The articles are subjected to an anonymous peer review and must include a title; Abstract (up to 250 words); Keywords (up to 5 keywords); Summary; Introduction; Main text; Final Considerations; References (at the end of the article); Footnotes; Acknowledgements (if appropriate) Table(s) and Figure(s) with caption(s) (on individual files) (if applicable)

The author(s) will receive a copy of the Journal once his (their) papers are published. The Brazilian Journal of Alternative Dispute Resolution – RBADR informs readers that the views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in the text belong solely to the author and not to the Journal Publisher or the editorial board members.

AUTHOR DECLARATION

To be granted full access to the Journal, please contact or check the website archives:

Editora Fórum

0800 704 3737

vendas@editoraforum.com.br

We invite libraries to list Open Access journals in their electronic journal catalogs. This publication system is developed to be hosted and operated by libraries in support of the publication work of the journals of your academic body (learn more by visiting the official page of Open Journal Systems).

PRIVACY STATEMENT

The names and addresses mentioned in this journal will be used exclusively for the services provided by this publication. They will not be made available for other purposes or to third parties.

PUBLICATION ETHICS AND PUBLICATION MALPRACTICE STATEMENT

These guidelines are consistent with the COPE Principles of Transparency, Best Practice Guidelines, and the COPE Code of Conduct. More details can be found here: https://publicationethics.org.

We encourage the best standards of publication ethics and take all possible measures against publication malpractices. As a publisher, the Journal's Editorial Board takes its guardianship duties over all publishing stages exceptionally seriously, and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities.

Duties and responsibilities of editors

In addition to many general duties, such as constantly improving the quality and integrity of the Journal, striving to meet the needs of authors and readers, encouraging academic debate, and others, the editors accept the obligation to apply best will and practice coping with the following responsibilities:

Editorial Board

The Editorial Board will be generated from recognized experts in the field. The editor will provide the full names and affiliations of the members as well as updated contact information for the editorial office on the journal webpage.

Publication decisions

The editor should decide which articles submitted to the Journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editor may be guided by the policies of the Journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Peer review process

All of a journal's content should be subjected to peer review. Articles submitted for possible publication are subjected to a double-blind, peer-review process. Editors first review articles. The editor may reject it because it does not deal with the subject matter for that Journal or because it is manifestly of a low quality, so it cannot be considered at all. Articles that are found suitable for review are then sent to two experts in the field of the paper. Referees of a paper are unknown to each other. Referees are asked to immediately classify the paper as publishable, with amendments and improvements, or not publishable. Referees' evaluations usually explicitly recommend what to do with the manuscript. The author then sees the referees' comments.

Editors should be ready to justify any significant deviation from the described process. Editors should not reverse decisions on publication unless serious problems are identified.

Editors should publish guidance to either authors or reviewers on everything that is expected of them. This guidance should be regularly updated and will refer to or link to this code.

Fair play

The editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the author's race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy. Editors' decision to accept or reject a paper for publication should be based only on the paper's importance, originality and clarity and the study's relevance to the Journal's aim.

Digital Archiving

The editor will ensure everyone's digital preservation of access to the journal content on the website.

Confidentiality

The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the Publisher. Editors will ensure that the material submitted remains confidential while under review.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's research without the author's written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e., should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other members of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers. Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication.

Procedures for dealing with unethical behavior

Unethical behavior may be identified and brought to the attention of the editor and Publisher at any time by anyone. Whoever informs the editor or Publisher of such conduct should provide sufficient information and evidence to initiate an investigation. All allegations should be taken seriously and treated similarly until a successful decision or conclusion is reached. Every reported unethical publishing behavior must be considered, even if discovered years after publication.

The editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper in conjunction with the Publisher. Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration to the respective complaint or claims made. Still, depending on the seriousness of the misconduct, they may also have further communications with the relevant institutions and research bodies.

Minor misconduct might be dealt with without the need to consult more widely. In any event, the author should be allowed to respond to any allegations.

Serious misconduct might require the application of one or more of the following measures:

• Inform or educate the author or reviewer where there appears to be a misunderstanding or misapplication of acceptable standards.
• Publication of a formal notice detailing the misconduct.
• A formal letter to the head of the author's or reviewer's department or funding agency.
• Formal retraction or withdrawal of a publication from the Journal, in conjunction with informing the head of the author or reviewer's department
• The imposition of a formal embargo on contributions from an individual for a defined period.

Duties and responsibilities of authors

Publication and Submission fee

No fees or charges are required from authors for manuscript processing. Authors pay neither submission nor publication fee.

Open Access Policy

The Journal is freely available online after the one-year embargo period. Authors must agree with this open-access policy, which enables unrestricted access and reuse of all published articles. Users can copy and redistribute the material in electronic format and build upon the material without further permission or fees being required, provided that appropriate credit is given.

Reporting standards

Authors of papers should present an accurate account of the work performed and an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial opinion works should be identified.

Data access and retention

Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should, in any event, be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and plagiarism

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, from passing off another's paper as the author's paper to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution) to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication

An author should not generally publish manuscripts describing the same research in multiple Journal primary publications. Submitting the same manuscript to numerous journals regularly constitutes unethical publishing behavior. Generally, an author should not present a previously published paper for consideration in another journal.

The copyright remains with the authors. Thus, they can decide about the eventual republication of their text. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.

Acknowledgment of sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have influenced the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained during confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the author's explicit written permission for the work involved in these services.

Authorship of the paper

Authorship should be limited to those who have contributed significantly to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where others have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, grants, or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible. Readers should be informed about who has funded the research and the role of the funders in the study.

Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, the author must promptly notify the journal editor or Publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. Suppose the editor or the Publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error. In that case, the author must promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.

Duties and responsibilities of reviewers

Contribution to editorial decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and, through the editorial communications with the author, may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication. Authors who wish to contribute to publications must do a fair share of reviewing.

Promptness
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgment of sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that the authors have not cited. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the appropriate citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper they know personally.

Disclosure and conflict of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer's research without the author's written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts with conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.