Peer Review Process

Revista Educação em Análise adopts the Double-Blind Review model as its standard peer-review process. In this process, both the reviewers and the authors remain anonymous; that is, reviewers receive the manuscript without the authors' identification, and the authors do not have access to the reviewers' identities.

After the completion of all evaluation stages and the manuscript's acceptance, the editorial team will send the authors an acceptance letter via email. Accepted manuscripts will be forwarded to the Editing stage, while rejected manuscripts will be returned to the authors.
Section editors and reviewers may have their names, ORCID, and respective roles in the journal identified at the end of the published article, depending on their consent. This information will be added only in the final editing stage, before the manuscript's publication.

Recommendations for Reviewers

We recommend that our reviewers:
A) Notify the editors if there is a conflict of interest regarding the work received for evaluation;
B) Inform whether it is possible to proceed with the evaluation and issue an opinion within the stipulated deadline;
C) Evaluate the conceptual consistency of the article;
D) Pay attention to the novelty of the article;
E) Verify the absence of plagiarism or undue appropriations from other publications and authors that have not been detected by self-plagiarism mechanisms;
F) Evaluate the relationship between the object of study, adopted research methods and techniques, and the theoretical frameworks used;
G) Prioritize for publication articles with explicit and well-highlighted contributing proposals;
H) Ensure confidentiality, anonymity, and ethics during the analysis of the documents.

Manuscript Screening and Evaluation

Manuscripts undergo two preliminary stages:
1. First Stage (Submission): The responsibility of the authors, this stage consists of inserting the manuscript into the journal's system, meeting all the required norms.
2. Second Stage (Screening): Under the responsibility of the section editor, the originality of the text, its relevance, and its alignment with the editorial policy and the journal's profile are verified. The average time for screening manuscripts until they are forwarded to reviewers is approximately 15 days.

The manuscript must be analytical, with a concise and coherent structure, in accordance with the usual standards for scientific articles. If it does not meet these criteria, the manuscript will be rejected in the first instance. If it meets the criteria, the manuscript will be forwarded for evaluation by ad hoc reviewers, who will issue their opinion based on the items described in the evaluation form.

If the decision is Accepted, the manuscript, after similarity (plagiarism) verification, will be eligible for copyediting. If the decision is Accepted with mandatory revisions, the Section Editor will forward the reviewers’ reports to the authors, requesting revisions within the established deadline. After the revisions are completed, the manuscript may be resubmitted to the reviewers, if necessary. If the decision is Rejected, the Section Editor will contact the author, forward the rejection reports, and formally reject the manuscript in the journal’s system.

Verification Procedures
In accordance with the guidelines of our plagiarism policy, after receiving two favorable peer review reports recommending publication, the manuscript proceeds to the similarity verification stage, conducted using iThenticate software by Turnitin.

The analysis of the report is not limited to the overall similarity percentage indicated by the system. A qualitative assessment is carried out by the editorial board, taking into consideration:
a) the nature of the similarities (properly referenced citations, bibliographic references, standardized methodological sections, etc.);
b) the extent and location of the occurrences;
c) the potential compromise of the originality of the work.

4. Editorial Conduct in the Event of Identified Similarities
If the similarity report indicates occurrences considered relevant, the Journal will adopt the following procedures:
4.1 Low-Level Similarities
When formal citation issues or minor inadequacies are identified:
The author will be formally notified;
The manuscript will be returned for mandatory revisions;
The editorial process will be suspended until the corrected version is resubmitted;
A new verification may be conducted.

4.2 Moderate Similarities
When there is extensive reproduction of excerpts without proper reference, but correction is possible:
The author will be notified with detailed identification of the occurrences;
A deadline will be granted for substantial rewriting and citation correction;
The manuscript may return to editorial evaluation after a new verification;
Final approval will depend on full compliance being demonstrated.

4.3 Serious Similarities
In cases of significant direct plagiarism, improper appropriation of data, or substantial duplication of publication:
The manuscript will be rejected, even if it has already received favorable peer review reports;
The author will be formally notified;
The Journal may inform the author’s affiliated institution, when applicable;
A temporary prohibition on new submissions (editorial embargo) may be imposed, as determined by the Editorial Board.

Evaluation Time

The evaluation of manuscripts is carried out by at least two ad hoc reviewers (Double-Blind Review method or informed review). In case of disagreement between the opinions, a third evaluation will be requested. The average evaluation time by reviewers is 1 to 2 months. The average time between submission and publication of approved articles can vary from 1 to 3 months.

DEIA Principles

Revista Educação em Análise adopts the DEIA (Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility) principles as fundamental pillars in its "Peer Review Process." These principles aim to ensure that the diversity of voices and perspectives is respected and valued, promoting an equitable and inclusive environment for all authors and reviewers involved.

In the context of peer review, diversity is essential to ensure that different cultural, social, and academic contexts are considered, enriching discussions and analyses. Equity is guaranteed through the creation of clear and fair criteria, which allow all works to be evaluated impartially, regardless of the authors' origin. Inclusion is reflected in the journal's openness to contributions from different groups, encouraging the participation of researchers from various backgrounds and experiences.

Finally, accessibility is a priority, ensuring that everyone has the necessary conditions to participate in the process, whether through technical support or the availability of information in accessible formats, such as the publication of articles in audio and video versions using text-to-speech conversion tools and AI voice generators. In this way, Revista Educação em Análise reaffirms its commitment to building a fairer and more representative academic space, promoting the quality and relevance of publications in the field of education.