Opinião Pública
Brief Background
|
Created in 1993, Opinião Pública is an open and free access academic journal from the Center for Studies on Public Opinion (Cesop) at Unicamp, an interdisciplinary research center established in 1992. Its mission is aligned with the objectives of Cesop, which is the development of scientific research in the area of political and social behavior through the promotion of combined teaching, research and human resources training initiatives, as well as the organization and provision of research bases and materials in these areas. Established to stimulate and consolidate national production in the areas of political and social behavior, Opinião Pública has the permanent mission of promoting a better understanding of contemporary changes in politics and their impacts on individuals and the ways in which society organizes and acts, disseminating the efforts of reflection produced by the relationship between theory and research. Its operation is guided by regulations approved by the Superior Council of Cesop. Throughout its history, Opinião Pública has consolidated itself as a reference not only in the national academic community, but also in Latin America. |
Open Science Compliance
|
Opinião Pública is committed to Open Science communication practices, such as open access; acceptance of preprints as the beginning of the article production flow; sharing of analysis data sets, instruments, statistical analysis scripts, scripts and additional materials, made available in open online repositories and/or on the journal's own website; transparency and gradual opening of the manuscript evaluation process; public dissemination of research and interoperability with the global flow of scientific information and knowledge. All published content is available at no cost to the user or his/her institution. Users are permitted to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full text of articles without prior permission from the publisher or author. There are also no costs for submitting and processing articles for authors. All manuscripts submitted to Opinião Pública must be unpublished, except those made available in preprint repositories, and cannot be simultaneously submitted for evaluation by other journals. Manuscripts published in the proceedings of scientific events and on personal profiles on academic platforms are also considered unpublished. The use of preprints as an option for the author implies that, when submitting the article to Opinião Pública, he/she must inform whether the manuscript is deposited on a preprint server, as well as its name and URL. |
Ethics in Publication
|
Opinião Pública supports the codes of scientific conduct of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (http://www.publicationethics.org/), the principles of the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) (https://doaj.org/about/#our-mission) as well as the guidelines of the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (http://www.cnpq.br/web/guest/diretrizes) and the manual of good practices of the São Paulo Research Foundation (http://www.fapesp.br/boaspraticas/). |
Focus and Scope
|
Opinião Pública publishes scientific articles by Brazilian and foreign researchers on theory and methodology in public opinion, social and political behavior, political culture and democracy, media studies, elections and political representation, which base their themes or hypotheses on theoretical frameworks and on empirical, quantitative, qualitative or documentary research data presented in a way that supports the results and conclusions. |
Digital Preservation
|
The online version of Opinião Pública is archived in the Cesop repository (www.cesop.unicamp.br) hosted on its own institutional server. It is available on the Unicamp Scientific Journals Portal (https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/op) and is digitally preserved in the Cariniana Digital Preservation Services Network (Ibct). Opinião Pública follows the standards defined in the SciELO Program Digital Preservation Policy. |
Indexing Sources
Bibliographic Journal Information
|
Websites and Social Media
Preprints
|
Opinião Pública accepts the publication of preprint articles. A preprint is a manuscript ready for submission to a journal, deposited on reliable preprint servers before or in parallel with submission to a journal. Preprints share with journals the originality in the publication of articles. The use of preprints is an option and choice of the authors and, when submitting the article to the journal, the name of the Preprint server and the DOI of the Preprint must be informed. Opinião Pública accepts preprints archived in the following servers: SciELO Preprints, Social Science Research Network and Research Gate. Other repositories may be considered upon analysis and approval by the Editorial Board. |
Peer Review Process
|
All articles submitted for publication in Opinião Pública that comply with the editorial standards undergo an initial evaluation by the Editorial Committee, which verifies the adequacy of the contributions to the thematic scope and analytical and editorial criteria of the journal. Once approved in the pre-selection, publication in Opinião Pública is subject to the review process by peer reviewers. The review process involves at least two researchers with doctorates and experts in the field of study. When invited to review an article, reviewers are asked to respond if there is a conflict of interest with respect to the authors and the research. The review of the article may: a) recommend its publication; b) recommend publication with changes; c) reject publication or d) reject publication but suggest resubmission. Decisions regarding the publication of articles are the responsibility of the journal editors, based on expert review. A third reviewer is regularly called upon whenever the results of the review are disparate. In cases of greater impasse, we call upon members of the Editorial Board for additional evaluation, highlighting that the members of the Board also act as reviewers. Three peer review formats are adopted by the journal: 1. Doubly anonymous review, in which neither reviewers nor authors know each other's identities; 2. Single-anonymous review, in which authors are known, but reviewers remain anonymous; 3. Open peer review, in which both authors and reviewers know each other's identities. At the time of submission, authors will be asked whether or not they wish to waive their anonymity, just as reviewers will be asked, at the time of accepting to carry out the evaluation, whether or not they wish to waive their anonymity. In the case of articles originating from preprint servers, it is not possible to guarantee the anonymity of the author and, therefore, the evaluation process can be simple-anonymous or open. |
Open Data
|
If the article is approved for publication, the author must share databases, codes, methods and other materials used and resulting from the research presented in the published article, which will be made available on the Opinião Pública website, or the author must indicate the repository where his/her data and materials are deposited. |
Fees
|
Opinião Pública does not charge fees for submission, evaluation and publication of articles. |
Ethics and Misconduct, Correction and Retraction Policy
|
When submitting an article for publication in Opinião Pública, the author must declare that all ethical guidelines concerning the integrity of scientific activities carried out during the research were respected, as well as inform sources of funding, such as research agencies. If applicable, the author must declare that the ethical principles were submitted to and approved by the ethics committee of his/her institution, informing the process number. Compliance with good ethical practices in research is the sole responsibility of the author. We strongly recommend that authors read the guidelines and principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (http://www.publicationethics.org/ and https://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts/risk-published-data), the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) (https://doaj.org/about/#our-mission), the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (http://www.cnpq.br/web/guest/diretrizes), the São Paulo Research Foundation (http://www.fapesp.br/boaspraticas/) and SciELO (https://wp.scielo.org/wp-content/uploads/Guia-de-Boas-Praticas-para-o-Fortalecimento-da-Etica-na-Publicacao-Cientifica.pdf) before submitting their articles. All articles will be evaluated disregarding social markers of difference, such as gender, sexual orientation, race, religious belief, nationality, among others, as well as the political positions of the authors. Regarding the authorship of the article, all those who contributed to the conception, development and analysis of the data presented are identified as authors. Therefore, it is the author's responsibility to identify and include all co-authors who effectively collaborated in writing the article. All authors must accept, demonstrably, responsibility for the content of the article, in addition to recording their respective contributions at the end of the manuscript, in case of acceptance for publication. If the author discovers that there has been some type of relevant error after the article has been published, he/she must immediately inform the editors so that the appropriate corrections can be published. Correction of incorrect information in tables, figures, charts, and parts of the text will be published in the following cases: a) correction of information inserted incorrectly in tables, figures, tables, and parts of the text; b) inclusion of information, such as inclusion of the funding institution with contract number; inclusion of the author and inclusion of author affiliation; and c) exclusion of information that is considered to be honest errors and that does not affect the scientific structure of the document. Regarding the identification of misconduct, which includes plagiarism, self-plagiarism and republication of articles, as well as data falsification, Opinião Pública uses the CopySpider and Turnitin similarity detection systems. However, if there is a failure in the misconduct detection process and the article is published, the author becomes subject to editorial sanctions, such as retraction of plagiarized or previously published scientific articles. The previously published article in which misconduct was identified remains indexed in the SciELO database as a retracted article. The retraction documents the reason for the retraction, duly referenced, through communication from the author or editor or other authorized agent, and published in the same journal. The retraction may be partial when the misconduct applies to a specific part of the article, without, however, compromising the entirety of the published research. In the event of a full retraction, all published content will be cancelled, and only the text of the retraction will be published with the justification forwarded by the editor and the basic data of the article, such as: title, authorship, affiliation and abstract. |
Policy on Conflict of Interest
|
Conflicts of interest may be personal, commercial, political, academic or financial in nature and may occur when authors, reviewers or editors have interests that, whether apparent or not, may influence the preparation or evaluation of manuscripts. When submitting a manuscript, authors are responsible for acknowledging and disclosing any financial or other conflicts that may have influenced the work. If there is, even potentially, a conflict of interest, the author must inform this in a signed document attached to the submission platform. Reviewers should disclose to the editor any conflicts of interest that might influence their opinion of the article and should declare themselves ineligible to review specific manuscripts if they believe that doing so is appropriate. If the author or reviewer is unsure of what might constitute a potential conflict of interest, he/she should contact Opinião Pública. For more information see: Disclosure of Financial and Non-Financial Relationships and Activities, and Conflicts of Interest. |
Adoption of Similarity Software
|
Opinião Pública uses CopySpider software and the Turnitin tool to identify plagiarism and self-plagiarism in articles submitted for publication. Articles are subject to a similarity assessment at the time of submission and, if approved for publication, are checked again by the tool. If a significant degree of similarity is detected with a previously published text, the corresponding author will be contacted to adjust the text, and the text may be rejected, given the requirement for originality. |
Adoption of Software Using Artificial Intelligence Resources
|
Authors who use generative artificial intelligence should describe in their article how they used the tool to ensure transparency and trust, in addition to presenting a justification for the use of such a tool. The manuscript should specify in the methodological section or equivalent: a) the name and version of the AI tool used; b) the date and time of the consultation; c) whether the tool was used for analysis, generation of results or writing of codes, and d) which part of the content was generated by an AI application. Authors are responsible for all content submitted and specially approved for publication and must therefore adhere to ethical guidelines that regulate misconduct. It is the author's responsibility to check content generated or reviewed by this tool in order to avoid plagiarism, fabrication or falsification of texts and images generated by AI. Authors must also ensure that all cited material is correctly attributed, including full citations. |
Gender and Sex Issues
|
The editorial team of Opinião Pública, in addition to the authors who publish in the journal, must always follow the guidelines on Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER). The SAGER guidelines comprise a set of guidelines that guide the reporting of information about sex and gender in study design, data analysis, and results and interpretation of findings. In addition, Opinião Pública observes the gender equity policy in the formation of its editorial board. |
Ethics Committee
|
Authors must attach a statement of approval from the ethics committee of the institution responsible for approving the research. |
Copyright
|
Authors of articles published by Opinião Pública retain the copyright of their work, licensing it under the Creative Commons Attribution CC BY 4.0 license, which allows the articles to be reused and distributed without restriction, as long as the original work is correctly cited. Authors grant Opinião Pública the right of first publication. |
Intellectual Property and Terms of Use
|
All content on Opinião Pública, except where otherwise specified, is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution CC BY 4.0 license. The data, opinions and concepts expressed in the articles, as well as the accuracy of the bibliographical references, are the sole responsibility of the author. Authors may self-archive their accepted manuscripts, publish them on personal blogs, institutional repositories, and academic social media, post them on their personal social media, and even enter into additional contracts separately (e.g., publishing the article as a book chapter) as long as the full citation to the journal website version is included. |
Sponsors and Promotion Agencies
|
Opinião Pública receives support from the following organizations:
|
Editor-in-Chief
|
Associate Editor
|
Editorial Council
|
Honorary Member of the Council
|
In memoriam Editors
|
|
Opinião Pública publishes original articles written in Portuguese, Spanish or English. Articles must be submitted (in .doc format) exclusively through the Scielo/ScholarOne online submission system: https://mc04.manuscriptcentral.com/op-scielo. All manuscripts submitted to Opinião Pública must be unpublished and cannot have been submitted for evaluation by other publications. Works not published in whole or in part in journals, books and websites are considered unpublished. Manuscripts published in the proceedings of scientific events, on personal profiles on academic platforms or on preprint platforms are also considered unpublished. If the article is approved for publication, the author must also share databases, codes, methods and other materials used and resulting from the research presented in the published article, which will be made available on the Opinião Pública website, or the author must indicate the repository where his/her data and materials are deposited. |
Authors' Contribution
|
Opinião Pública adopts the CRediT taxonomy (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) to identify the contributions of each author to the article. All those who contributed to the problematization and conceptualization, development and analysis of the presented data, writing and approval of the final version are identified as authors. Thus, after the article is approved, the corresponding author will be asked to inform the contributions of each author for each of the roles, which will be inserted at the end of the article. For more information about the CRediT system, visit the official website. |
Manuscript Preparation
|
When submitting the manuscript, the responsible author must provide the following information for all authors: Full name, ORCID, institutional affiliation, email, mini CV stating the title, sources of support for the work, including names of sponsors, contract number (if any). Submissions with incomplete data will be rejected immediately. |
Article Submission Format
|
The article must be between 7,000 and 14,000 words long, including images, notes and references. The submitted article must include an abstract of no more than 900 characters, which contains a description of the object analyzed and the objectives of the article; type of research, methodology or approach used; results; implications and originality of the article. The abstract has a specific field to be filled in on the submission platform. Articles submitted with abstracts cut for exceeding the number of characters allowed will be returned. The title of the article must have a maximum of 20 words, and be presented in four languages, as well as the five keywords that identify its content. |
Digital Assets
|
Charts, maps, tables, graphs, etc. must be in their proper places in the body of the text, in jpg format (300 to 500 pdi), with title, caption and source. If the article is approved in the evaluation process, these figures must be sent in their original formats, so that they can be edited. |
Citations and References
|
Bibliographic citations follow the ABNT: NBR 10520 standard and should be made in the body of the text and follow the following scheme: (Author's Surname, date) or (Author's Surname, date, page). Ex.: (Souza, 1976; Assis, 2000) or (Souza, 1976, p. 64). Different titles by the same author published in the same year will be identified by a letter after the date. Ex.: (Almeida, 1989a), (Almeida, 1989b). In the case of two authors and two publications by the same author, the citation should be as follows: (Souza and Almeida, 1990; Sanches, 2000, 2005). The bibliographical references used must be presented at the end of the article, listed in alphabetical order, following the ABNT: NBR 6023 standards, as shown in the following examples. Please, note not only the order of the elements, but also to the kinds of sources and the punctuation conventions used in each citation. Book: Author's surname in small caps, First name (abbreviated). Book: Author's surname in small caps, First name (abbreviated). Edition number, if not the first. Place of publication: name of publisher, year. Chapter: Last name in small caps, First name (abbreviated), Chapter title. In: Last name in small caps, First name (abbreviated), of author(s) or organizer(s). Book title in italics: Subtitle without italics. Place of publication: Publisher's name, page range, year. Collection: Last name in small caps, First name (abbreviated). Title of essay. In: Last name in small caps, First name (abbreviated) of organizer(s). Title of collection in italics: subtitle without italics. Number of edition, if not the first. Number of edition, if not the first. Journal Article: Surname in small caps, First name (abbreviated). Title of the article in quotation marks. Name of the journal in italics, place of publication, volume and number of the periodical, page range, period of publication, year. Dissertations and PhD theses: Author´s last name in small caps, First name (initials). Title in quotation marks. Place. Total number of pages. Academic level and area of studies: Master's thesis or Doctorate's Dissertation. Academic institution, year. Internet (electronic documents): Author´s last name in small caps, First name (initials). Title in italics, [Online]. Producer, date. Available at: < >. Access: day month, year (E.g.: 5 jan. 2012). Paper presented at an event: Author´s last name in small caps, Name (abbreviated). Title of the work presented in quotation marks. In: Proceedings of the event (number and title, if any), city of the event, document pages (if any), date of publication. The article section titles should be formatted in bold and the subsection titles in italics. Sections and subsections of the article should not be numbered. If there are citations and/or references to sections of the article itself throughout the text, reference the section title. E.g..: As discussed in the section “Opinions and attitudes about democracy...”. Whenever there is a reference to the article itself, it should be named as “article” and not as “paper”, “work”, “study”, etc. Table titles and sources must be complete (when they are "created by the author", specify the data on which they are based. E.g.: Created by the author based on data from the TSE). Titles and sources should be outside of tables and graphs. The “%” and other symbols should be removed from tables and graphs, when applicable, and placed next to their respective titles. E.g.: Table 1 - Title: Frequency of variables indicating “steals, but does” (%) We ask that you pay attention to the spelling of proper names and dates of publications cited in the body of the text and in the bibliographic references to minimize ambiguities. The Opinião Pública team will review any typographical errors, spelling, grammar, spelling of proper names, acronyms, and publication dates in the bibliographic references in the body of the text and in the references at the end. However, the more care is taken with all these aspects, the less likely there will be errors in the version to be published. The article’s DOI is assigned by the Opinião Pública editing and layout team when the article is prepared for publication. |
Contact
|
Center for Studies on Public Opinion, University of Campinas |