The CMM has strict ethical values for the publication of its issues, based on and inspired by the concepts and guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (https://publicationethics.org/) and the São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP) (https://fapesp.br/boaspraticas/).

The key to our code of ethics is integration and dialogue with the scientific community of the area. Effective participation of the Editorial Board, the peer review, guidelines, editorial flow and transparent evaluation criteria are the CMM’s basis.

Below, we present the main points that guide our actions during the editorial process and that must be adopted by all participants involved, that is, editors, reviewers, authors and other members of the editorial team. Questions or problems not addressed in this code, or exceptional situations, will be resolved based on the aforementioned codes.

Editors

The CMM has a permanent editor and, eventually, invites editors for the scientific management of special or professional issues. Scientific management is understood as the decisions that make it possible to provide the best possible content for readers and to primarily value the quality and veracity of the scientific information presented by authors and reviewers. Editors must:

- act to preserve confidentiality in the double-blind review and in the privacy of all participants in the editorial process;

- guarantee a technical, accurate, fair peer review and in accordance with the evaluation guidelines (link) adopted by the publication;

- accept or reject a submission solely and exclusively on the basis of scientific merits and on its compliance with the focus and scope of the publication, regardless of any social, political, religious, sexual or institutional issue.

- refuse to edit submissions where there are conflicts of interest, whether they are issues of collaboration or competition, submissions of own authorship and potential economic conflicts;

Evaluators

Peer review is the process responsible for the integrity of our publications. Evaluators have a critical and central role in the validation of articles. It is a voluntary work and must also follow ethical precepts. Evaluators must:

- know and agree with the CMM evaluation guidelines (link);

- refuse to evaluate submissions in which there are conflicts of interest, whether they are issues of collaboration or competition and with potential economic conflicts;

- refuse to evaluate submissions in which, for whatever reason, recognize the author(s);

- request corrections and/or additions of references that are relevant to the theme addressed, especially if they are authors’ references;

- accept or reject a submission solely and exclusively on the basis of scientific merits and on its compliance with the focus and scope of the publication, regardless of any social, political, religious, sexual or institutional issue;

- as an evaluator, recognize and indicate to the editor possible limitations that may impair the quality of the evaluation.

Authors

All authors are responsible for the submitted and published text. During the submission process, the main author to be contacted and who will be responsible for communicating with the other authors during the entire editorial flow must be indicated.

Any submission that has results of research carried out in a situation of potential conflict of interest must contain, clearly and prominently, the declaration of the existence of that conflict.

The CMM reserves the right, if deemed necessary, to check with the institutions the professional bond declared by the authors.

Simultaneous submission or published on other media

According to our Guidelines for Authors (link), it is not allowed making a submission that is already under evaluation or published in another journal, even with substantial changes.

Only original articles must be submitted. In the case of texts resulting from dissertations and theses, their content must be substantially expanded, present original results and inform during the submission in the field “comments to the editor.”

Plagiarism and Self-Plagiarism

Plagiarism is a serious ethical transgression, especially in scientific work. All use of someone else’s work must be properly referenced in the article submitted.

Plagiarism can occur in several ways, but we highlight:

- Absence of citation when using other people’s texts, whether literal (direct citation) or rewritten (indirect citation);

- use of other people’s concepts or research without due recognition;

- use of images, figures, tables, charts, maps, graphs and other visual or structural elements without due reference, even if adapted, altered, inspired by or based on the original;

- the non-recognition of co-authors as, for example, in the results of group research with participation of several researchers.

All submissions are previously analyzed during the Desk Review for the absence of (direct or indirect) citations whether in textual or visual elements. And, above all, use of other people’s concepts, theories, or research without due recognition.

The CMM uses resources from DupliChecker software and searches on Google Scholar, by sampling, especially in sections with no citations. The verification of plagiarism may occur again, in greater depth, at the evaluators’ recommendation.

Suspicions of plagiarism will be investigated and if the plagiarism is evident, the CMM will reject the submission or exclude the article if it is already published.

Self-plagiarism, self-citation or redundant publication occurs when an author publishes the same text or a significant part of a text more than once. Whatever the medium or language, the repetition of parts already published will be only allowed if they are essential for the work presented. The CMM does not limit the percentage of self-citations, but recommends that authors use this resource exclusively when strictly necessary.

Authorship and Collaborations

Despite the multidisciplinarity characteristic of the area in which it operates, the CMM focuses on articles in the areas of humanities and social sciences. Thus, we understand that the relation of authorship and contribution is not exercised in a clearly distinct and diverse manner as can occur in other disciplines, for example, in the pure sciences or in the medical field.

In this way, the CMM complies with the Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT) specification system, which is maintained by the Consortia for Advancing Standards in Research Administration Information (CASRAI) and adopts taxonomy with 14 different roles that can be attributed either as authorship or contribution. However, due to the characteristics of the area, we consider only five attributions mandatory, and nine are optional, as shown in the following table:

 

Chart 1: Authorial participation

	ATTRIBUTIONS	AUTHOR 1	AUTHOR 2	AUTHOR 3
MANDATORY	Conceptualization
	Methodology
	Writing – review & editing
	Writing – original draft
OPTIONAL	Data curation
	Formal analysis
	Funding acquisition
	Investigation
	Project administration
	Resources
	Software
	Supervision
	Validation
	Visualization

Source: Adapted from Casrai (????)

Note: The description of each attribution is available by placing the mouse cursor on each item, and also on the website: https://casrai.org/credit/.

We emphasize that all authors are responsible for the article published. The attributions collaborate to a more precise identification of the role played by each author in the elaboration of the article, especially in the areas of humanities and social sciences with frequent collaboration between senior and junior researchers, advisors and students.

Scientific misconduct, errors, corrections and retractions

We understand as natural the process of validation by the scientific community, its constant development and consequent breaking of existing paradoxes in the areas.

Again, the characteristics of the human and social sciences allow for different readings and understandings of the various themes that are published in the CMM. For controversial, problematic political issues, we reinforce that we are an open and diverse academic space, and we invite and encourage everyone to submit their texts, whatever the theoretical and/or methodological approach.

However, despite the efforts of our editors and evaluators, errors and scientific misconduct may be made and must be corrected and/or portrayed, or even sanctioned.
 Any person or organization can request investigation of possible errors, inconsistencies, scientific misconduct or other ethical inadequacies of any article published on the CMM through the e-mail: editor.cmm@eceme.eb.mil.br. Every request will be treated as confidential, unless otherwise requested.

We deal with possible errors at three different levels and actions:

1) minor corrections – when there are unintentional errors that do not invalidate part or the entire article and can be repaired with an erratum or correction and the publication of a new version (duly identified and marked on the website). Examples: mistaken attribution of authorship in citation, identification of year, pagination, edition, version, among others;

2) corrections and retraction – when there are errors that do not alter the results presented, but may harm or cause damage to someone or institution;

3) exclusion and retraction – when there are serious errors or ethical issues.

For all complaints, authors will be informed so that they can manifest themselves and present their justifications. The analysis of the case will be carried out by the editor, who, depending on the complexity of the case, can count on the support of members of the Editorial Board who will be summoned to mediate, analyze the case and validate the editorial decision.

The entire process involving the exclusion of an already published article will be available for consultation at the same link where it was originally published, with the necessary secrets kept.

If it is proven that any submission has any type of false, fraudulent content, plagiarism or any unethical content/action, authors will be informed and must submit their justifications.
If the bad intention is clear, the CMM will contact the Ethics Committee of the author’s institution, the submission will be excluded and any future submissions by the author(s) will be refused.

Conflicts of interest

The CMM adopts the definitions and recommendations of FAPESP’s “Code of good scientific practice” (https://fapesp.br/boaspraticas/) on conflicts of interest:

3.4.1. A potential conflict of interest occurs in situations in which the researcher’s due interest in advancing science and interests of another nature, even legitimate ones, can be reasonably perceived as conflicting and prejudicial to the objectivity and impartiality of scientific decisions, regardless of the researcher’s intent or knowledge thereof.

3.4.2. In these situations, based on the nature and gravity of the conflict, the researcher should consider his or her aptitude to make decisions and whether he or she should abstain from making them.

3.4.3. In cases in which the researcher is convinced that a potential conflict of interests will not jeopardize the objectivity and impartiality of his or her scientific decisions, the existence of the conflict should be clearly disclosed to all parties involved in these decisions immediately after these decisions have been made.

In the CMM publication areas, we highlight some situations where there may be potential conflicts of interest and which must be carefully evaluated by authors, evaluators and editors. Articles dealing with themes:

- related to the defense industry, especially when dealing with public and private companies by name;

- related to institutions and projects, especially if the author(s) is (are) directly part of the reported process.

Copyright

The CMM is a non-profit academic journal based on the Open Access policy and, therefore, all content is fully available.

All information, images, figures or other graphic elements contained in the submissions must be in accordance with our licensing, and with the due credits.

Since 2019, the CMM has been licensed under Creative Commons conditions (CC BY 4.0)

The authors are the copyright holders, without restrictions, of their articles.

Under the CC-BY 4.0 license, you have the right to:

Share – copy and redistribute material in any medium or format

Adapt – remix, transform, and create from the material for any purpose, even if commercial.

According to the following terms:

Attribution – you must give the appropriate credit, provide a link to the license and indicate whether changes have been made. You must do so under any reasonable circumstances, but in no way that would suggest that the licensor supports you or your use.

Confidentiality

All personal information of authors and evaluators will be used exclusively for the purpose of publication and the relationship with CMM. No information will be given to third parties or will be used other than that mentioned.