Ethical Policies

ETHICS AND GOOD PUBLISHING PRACTICES

The Code of Ethics of the Revista do Serviço Público (RSP) guides the duties of authors, reviewers, and the editorial committee, and makes public any decisions regarding retraction and plagiarism. The editorial practice guidelines are based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Guide for Editors.

AUTHORS

Authors must submit original articles presenting an objective reflection on their importance to the field of public affairs. Data must be represented accurately. Fraudulent statements or inaccurate data are unethical and unacceptable.

Authors must comply with RSP's open data principles and be prepared to provide access to their data if necessary, retaining it for a reasonable period after publication.

Authors must not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously and/or publish the same article in different journals. All forms of plagiarism are considered unethical editorial conduct and are therefore unacceptable.

If a situation of plagiarism or duplication is identified during the editorial process, the editorial team will analyze the case and issue the appropriate communication. Depending on the case, the institution where the research was conducted and the funding agency (if any) will also be notified. The editorial team may request the necessary changes or exclude the work from the editorial process.

If, after publication, the RSP receives a report that a work contains plagiarism, the editorial team will analyze the report and, once confirmed, will request that the authors issue the appropriate retraction.

Authors assume collective responsibility for the work. All persons who made a significant contribution to the project must be listed as co-authors. The lead author must ensure that all co-authors are included in the article and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the article and agreed to submit it for publication.

Articles submitted to the RSP must have a maximum of six (6) authors. Once submitted, no changes to the article's authorship (removal, addition, or substitution of names) may be made.

USE OF GENERATIVE AI OR AI-ASSISTED TECHNOLOGY IN SCIENTIFIC WRITING

The use of generative artificial intelligence and AI-assisted technologies in the drafting of manuscripts submitted to the Revista do Serviço Público (RSP) is permitted exclusively for the purpose of improving the clarity, precision, and quality of the text's language.

The use of these tools must be carried out under human supervision, with the author(s) obligated to fully review, edit, and validate the content produced. Final and full responsibility for the manuscript's content rests solely with the authors and may not be transferred, in whole or in part, to artificial intelligence systems.

Explicit disclosure of the use of generative AI or AI-assisted technologies in the manuscript preparation process is mandatory. Such disclosure must appear in the published article, in a specific section defined by RSP's editorial guidelines.

Under no circumstances may AI tools or AI-assisted technologies be listed as authors or co-authors, or cited as such. Authorship entails ethical, intellectual, and accountability attributions that belong exclusively to human beings.

Failure to comply with these provisions may constitute an ethical violation, subject to the applicable measures set forth in RSP's editorial guidelines.

The use of generative artificial intelligence or AI-assisted tools to create or alter figures or images in manuscripts submitted to the Revista do Serviço Público (RSP) is prohibited.

The following practices are considered prohibited:

a) introducing, removing, moving, or obscuring visual elements in images or figures;
b) modifying features in a way that compromises the integrity or reliability of the data represented;
c) using generative AI to create artistic works to be included in articles.

Only minimal technical adjustments are permitted, such as brightness, contrast, or color balance, provided they do not result in the concealment, distortion, or elimination of information contained in the original material.

The sole exception to this policy occurs when the use of AI or AI-assisted tools is an integral part of the research project or the scientific methods employed. In such cases, a detailed and replicable description of the procedure is mandatory in the methods section, including:

a) the purpose and manner of use of the AI;
b) identification of the tool or model used (name, version, extension, and manufacturer);
c) a methodological justification ensuring transparency and reproducibility.

Authors must fully comply with the usage and licensing policies of the AI software employed, ensuring proper attribution and ethical compliance.

Failure to comply with these provisions will be considered a serious ethical violation, subjecting the manuscript and/or authors to the applicable editorial measures, including rejection, retraction, and notification to the relevant institutional bodies.

REVIEWERS

Reviewers must accept manuscripts on topics similar to their area of expertise, ensuring an adequate evaluation aimed at improving the manuscript's quality. Reviewers must notify the editor of any situation that prevents their participation in a review process.

Reviewers must treat authors and their work with the same respect they themselves would wish to receive in any space of scientific debate. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable.

Reviewers should suggest new citations related to their own work or that of others when necessary and relevant. The inclusion of references merely to increase the reviewer's own citation count is unacceptable.

Reviewers must declare any conflict of interest that would prevent them from carrying out the review.

Reviewers must treat every manuscript received as a strictly confidential document, and its disclosure, reproduction, or use for any purpose is prohibited.

Reviewers must respect review deadlines and submit a well-founded opinion, contributing to the speed of the editorial process.

USE OF GENERATIVE AI OR AI-ASSISTED TECHNOLOGY IN SCIENTIFIC REVIEW

Reviewers are prohibited from uploading a submitted manuscript, in whole or in part, into generative artificial intelligence tools or any AI-assisted technologies.

Reviewers are prohibited from using AI tools to draft, revise, or improve their reviews, even if the sole purpose is to improve the language or clarity of the text.

Failure to comply with these provisions will be considered a serious ethical violation, subjecting the reviewer to the applicable measures under RSP's editorial policy.

EDITORIAL COMMITTEE

It is the duty of the editorial committee to ensure that no form of bias affects or influences editorial decisions.

It is the duty of the editorial committee to ensure strict compliance with the rules established by the RSP and to resolve issues through prompt retraction communicated to the academic community.

It is the duty of the editorial committee not to invite reviewers who work in the same department at the same institution as the authors or who have ever been co-authors with them.

It is the duty of the editorial committee to be aware of and act swiftly to resolve any issues involving fraud. If fraud is detected in an article during the editorial process (omission or manipulation of data in order to influence research results; calculation errors; experimental errors), the editorial committee will analyze the case and notify the author(s). The editorial team may request the necessary changes or exclude the work from the editorial process. If, after publication, the RSP receives a report of fraud, the editorial team will analyze the case and request the article's retraction.

Reports of scientific misconduct will be received by the Editorial Committee and evaluated on the basis of evidence, respecting the right to a fair hearing and the right of defense.