Editorial: As rodadas de correções e a carta-resposta do autor à aprovação condicionada – sobre o controle e o aprimoramento dos artigos no processo editorial científico

Vinicius Gomes de Vasconcellos

doi:10.22197/rbdpp.v3i3.101

Authors

Vinicius Gomes de Vasconcellos USP - FICS/SP IBRASPP/RS http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2020-5516

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22197/rbdpp.v3i3.101

Keywords:

Editorial, correction rounds, author, peer review, reviewers’ comments.

Abstract

This editorial intends to examine the systematics of the correction rounds in the cases of articles that receive the decision of "conditional approval", based on the reviewers’ comments and the evaluation of the journal editorial team. Besides reinforcing the importance of such phase to the production of consistent scientific knowledge, premises and guidelines will be presented to inform the author's action to correct the article and write the response letter to the editorial board.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Vinicius Gomes de Vasconcellos, USP - FICS/SP IBRASPP/RS

Doutorando em Direito pela Universidade de São Paulo (USP), com período de sanduíche (PDSE/Capes) na Universidad Complutense de Madrid (ESP). Mestre em Ciências Criminais pela Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul - PUCRS (2014), com bolsa integral CAPES. Pós-graduado em "Derechos fundamentales y garantías constitucionales en la Justicia Penal" pela Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha (ESP) (2013). Graduado em Ciências Jurídicas e Sociais pela PUCRS (2012), com a realização de pesquisas como bolsista de iniciação científica CNPQ (2009/2012). Pesquisador visitante no Max Planck Institute for Foreign and International Criminal Law (2014 e 2017). Editor-chefe da Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal (RBDPP) e editor-assistente da Revista Brasileira de Ciências Criminais (RBCCRIM) (B1). Membro do Corpo de Pareceristas das Revistas de Estudos Criminais (B1); Direito da Cidade (A1); Direito, Estado e Sociedade (A1); Direito e Práxis (A1); além de diversas outras revistas científicas. Professor convidado (Pós-Graduação Lato Sensu) da FESP (PR), Unisinos (RS), ABDConst (RJ), FDV (ES) e IBCCRIM-Coimbra (SP). Professor de Direito Penal e Processual Penal das Faculdades Integradas Campos Salles (SP). ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2020-5516. Produção disponível em: usp-br.academia.edu/ViniciusVasconcellos. ResearchGATE: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Vinicius_Vasconcellos3. ResearcherID: http://www.researcherid.com/rid/H-6179-2016. PUBLONS: http://publons.com/a/1174099/

References

AGARWAL, Rajshree; ECHAMBADI, Raj; FRANCO, April M.; SARKAR, Mb. Reap rewards: maximizing benefits from reviewer comments. Academy of Management Journal, vol. 49, n. 2, p. 191-196, 2006. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2006.20786044

ANNESLEY, Thomas M. Top 10 Tips for Responding to Reviewer and Editor Comments. Clinical Chemistry, vol. 57, n. 4, p. 551-554, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2011.162388

BEDEIAN, Arthur G. Balancing authorial voice and editorial omniscience: the “it’s my paper and I’ll say what I want to” versus “ghostwriters in the sky” minuet. In: BARUCH, Y.; KONRAD, A.; AGUINIS, H.; STARBUCK, W. (eds.). Opening the black box of editorship. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008. p. 134-142. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230582590_14

CASADEVALL, Arturo; FANG, Ferric C. Is peer review censorship? Infection and immunity, v. 77, n. 4, p. 1273-1274, abr. 2009. https://doi.org/10.1128/IAI.00018-09

CUMMINGS, Peter; RIVARA, Frederick P. Responding to reviewer’s comments on submitted articles. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, v. 156, n. 2, p. 105-107, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpedi.156.2.105

FERREIRA, Manuel A. S. P. V. Responder aos Revisores. Revista Ibero-Americana de Estratégia, vol. 3, n. 1, p. 1-6, jan./mar. 2014. https://doi.org/10.5585/riae.v13i1.2099

FREY, Bruno S. Publishing as prostitution? Choosing between one’s own ideas and academic success. Public Choice, v. 116, p. 205-223, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024208701874

KOTZ, Daniel; CALS, Jochen W. L. Effective writing and publishing scientific papers, part XII: responding to reviewers. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, vol. 67, n. 3, p. 243, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.10.003

MAJUMDER, Kakoli. How do authors feel when they receive negative peer reviewer comments? An experience from Chinese biomedical researchers. European Science Editing, vol. 42, n. 2, p. 31-35, mai. 2016.

MUCHENJE, Voster. Editorial: How to respond to reviewers’ comments. South African Journal of Animal Science, vol. 47, n. 2, p. 116-117, 2017. https://doi.org/10.4314/sajas.v47i2.1

ROSENFELD, Richard. How to review journal manuscripts. Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, vol. 142, p. 472-486, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otohns.2010.02.010

SAMET, Jonathan M. Dear Author - Advice from a Retiring Editor. American Journal of Epidemiology, vol. 150, n. 5, p. 433-436, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a010030

SHAW, Jason D. Responding to reviewers. Academy of Management Journal, v. 55, n. 6, p. 1261-1263, 2012. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2012.4006

SILVER, Pamela. Advice for early-career peer reviewers and authors responding to peer reviews. Freshwater Science, v. 35, n. 4, p. 1073-1075, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1086/688968

VASCONCELLOS, Vinicius G. Editorial: a função do periódico científico e do editor para a produção do conhecimento no Direito e nas ciências criminais. Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal, Porto Alegre, vol. 3, n. 1, p. 9-17, jan./abr. 2017. https://doi.org/10.22197/rbdpp.v3i1.34

VASCONCELLOS, Vinicius G. Editorial: controle por pares e a função do revisor – premissas e orientações para uma avaliação consistente. Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal, Porto alegre, vol. 3, n. 2, p. 437-458, mai./ago. 2017. https://doi.org/10.22197/rbdpp.v3i2.70

WILLIAMS, Hywel C. How to reply to referees’ comments when submitting manuscripts for publication. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, v. 51, n. 1, p. 79-83, jul. 2004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaad.2004.01.049

WINCK, J.C.; WEDZICHA, J.A.; FONSECA, J.A.; AZEVEDO, L.F. To publish or perish: how to review a manuscript. Revista Portuguesa de Pneumología, vol. 17, n. 2, p. 96-103, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2173-5115(11)70022-7