Editorial Policies

Aims and Scope

The mission of Transportes is to publish and disseminate original articles with results of relevant scientific and technological research in Transportation Engineering and related fields. The journal focuses on innovative and well-founded solutions to complex problems in transportation systems, valuing contributions that offer new perspectives and insights into significant challenges in the sector.

Transportes is a journal aimed at faculty, researchers, and professionals who work with and utilize knowledge and techniques in:

• Transportation Planning Models and Techniques,
• Territorial Planning of Transportation,
• Urban and Road Transportation,
• Logistics and Freight Transportation Management,
• Economic, Social, Political, and Environmental Aspects of Transportation,
• Transportation Infrastructure, and
• Transportation Education.

Article types

Transportes publishes the following types of articles:

• articles reporting relevant technical-scientific advancements; and
• literature reviews, providing a comprehensive review of a topic or subject, predominantly by invitation. Unsolicited submissions of this type are accepted on a limited basis.

The manuscript must effectively represent a contribution to the field by addressing a relevant topic, with a theoretical foundation that is current and reflects the state-of-the-art in the area. The method must be clearly stated, and the analyses and conclusions must be clear, aligned with the proposed objectives, and supported by the results.

The manuscript's subject matter must be closely related to Transportation Engineering. One way to ensure this fit is by verifying if similarly themed articles have been published in Transportes or other recognized journals in the field of Transportation Engineering.

Periodicity

Transportes publishes a single annual volume, with articles released on a continuous basis as they are accepted. Up to volume 32 (2024), three issues were published annually.

Peer review process

The selection of manuscripts for publication is based on a peer-review process. The evaluation process follows a double-blind procedure, ensuring that reviewers are unaware of the manuscript's authors and vice versa. An editorial decision is made based on the assessments  provided by at least two experts in the relevant field. The following diagram illustrates the stages of the evaluation of manuscripts submitted for publication:

The process begins with  the authors submitting their manuscript (1). The editorial office then conducts an initial check (2)  to ensure compliance with the journal's guidelines. If the manuscript does not adhere to the instructions for authors, adjustments may be requested from the authors (3).. The editorial office also performs a plagiarism check (2) before forwarding the manuscript to the editor-in-chief for an initial evaluation (5). At this stage, the manuscript may be summarily rejected by the editor-in-chief (4) if:

• there is evidence of plagiarism or self-plagiarism;
• it has been previously published;
• it lacks technical content or  scientific or technological relevance;
• the topic does not align with the scope of Transportes; or
• any of its authors already has three manuscripts at any stage of the review or publication process.

If the initial evaluation by the editor-in-chief is favourable, the manuscript is forwarded to the associate editor who specializes in the subject matter (6). The associate editor then conducts an initial review (7) similar to that of the editor-in-chief (5), applying similar criteria for summary rejection of the manuscript (4) or forwarding it for review by at least two experts in the field (8). Based on the analyses and recommendations of the reviewers (9), the associate editor may:

• Reject the manuscript due to significant deficiencies identified by the reviewers (11).
• Initiate a new round of peer review (12) based on the manuscript revised  by the authors (13). 
• Accept the manuscript for publication (14).

If the associate editor decides to initiate a new review round (12), the authors must submit a revised version of the manuscript along with a document addressing all comments, suggestions, and criticisms made by the reviewers (13) within the deadline set by the associate editor. Failure to meet these requirements may lead to the rejection of the manuscript (11). In subsequent rounds of review, the associate editor determines  the number and selection of ad-hoc reviewers to evaluate the revised manuscript and the responses to comments and criticisms.

Once the manuscript is accepted for publication (14), the authors can decide to publish it in Portuguese or English (15) and prepare the final draft in the chosen language for publication (16). To ensure a minimum quality standard, articles to be published in English undergo a review by the associate editor-in-chief (17), who may request revisions from the authors (16) or opt to publish the version in Portuguese instead. After the final draft is approved (17), the ANPET office contacts the authors to collect the article processing charge (18).

Next, the manuscript proceeds to the final production stage (19), where authors may be asked to refine figures and tables. The final version of the article, ready for publication, is then reviewed by the associate editor-in-chief for final approval (20), after which its publication is scheduled. To schedule the publication of an article, Transportes applies the following criterion:

• each author may have up to two articles published per volume, except for articles derived from award-winning papers presented at the annual ANPET conference.

Open Science

Transportes provides immediate free access to its content, supporting the principle that the unrestricted and widespread sharing of scientific information promotes greater global democratization of knowledge.

Authorship Determination

Authorship determination

Transportes values the authorship of articles published within it, recognizing its importance for academic credit and its social and ethical implications. Authorship also ensures transparency and accountability for the published article. Therefore, Transportes adopts the criteria of the ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors) to determine the authorship of submitted manuscripts. Transportes requires that  an author must simultaneously meet four criteria:

• Have significantly contributed to the conception or design of the study, or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of the data collected in the study; and
• Have an active role in drafting the initial version or critically revising the manuscript; and
• Give final approval of the version to be published; and
• Agree to be accountable for all aspects of the article, ensuring that any questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the article are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Collaborators who do not meet all four criteria should have their contributions acknowledged in the acknowledgments section of the article.

Authors are also responsible for ensuring that all those designated as authors meet all four criteria for authorship and that all contributors who meet these criteria are recognized as authors. Authors should also have confidence in the integrity of their co-authors' contributions.

All authors are encouraged to read the ICMJE recommendations regarding the definition of authorship for manuscripts, available at ICMJE Authorship Guidelines.

Authorship Contribution

In line with its ongoing commitment to promoting transparency and accountability in scientific dissemination, Transportes requires that the specific contributions of each author be identified using the CRediT taxonomy.

Manuscripts submitted for publication must include a “CRediT Authorship Contribution Statement” section, which describes the individual contribution of each author according to the roles defined in the CRediT taxonomy. This section must also affirm that all authors agree with the descriptions provided for their own contributions as well as those of each co-author.

The CRediT taxonomy defines 14 distinct roles that describe the specific contribution of each collaborator to the manuscript. These roles include: Conceptualization; Data Curation; Formal Analysis; Funding Acquisition; Investigation; Methodology; Project Administration; Resources; Software; Supervision; Validation; Visualization; Writing – Original Draft Preparation; and Writing – Review & Editing. It should be noted that not all roles apply to every manuscript, and some authors may have contributed in multiple roles.

Use of Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Technology

Transportes adopts the ICMJE recommendations regarding the use of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted technology in the preparation of manuscripts.

Authors must disclose the use of AI-assisted technologies in their submissions, detailing in both the cover letter and the appropriate sections of the manuscript how and where these tools were used. AI tools should not be listed as authors, as they cannot be held accountable for the manuscript's accuracy, integrity, and originality, which are factors intrinsically connected to authorship. Human authors are responsible for reviewing and editing AI-generated content to ensure it is correct and unbiased. Additionally, authors must ensure there is no plagiarism and provide proper attribution for all quoted material.

Previous Publication

Manuscripts submitted for publication must be original and unpublished. They should not have been published or simultaneously submitted to a conference or other journals. Papers that were published in conference proceedings as abstracts or extended abstracts may be considered for publication only if they represent a substantial expansion of the research and scientific findings. In such cases, authors must inform the editor about the previous publication at the time of manuscript submission.

Please also refer to the ethical standards for authors adopted by Transportes.

Retractions and corrections

To maintain the integrity of the academic record and the publication process, Transportes follows the COPE guidelines on retractions. Briefly, these are the guidelines for retractions: 

• Reasons for Retraction: Retractions should be considered if there is clear evidence that the results are unreliable due to major errors (such as miscalculations or experimental errors), fabrication or falsification of data, plagiarism, unauthorized use of material or data, copyright infringement, unethical research, compromised peer review, or if the author did not disclose a significant conflict of interest. 
• Retraction Notices: Notices should be linked to the retracted article, clearly identify the article, be clearly marked as retractions, be published promptly to minimize harmful effects, be accessible to all readers, indicate who is retracting the article, state the reasons for the retraction, and be objective, factual, and avoid inflammatory language. 
• When Retractions are Not Appropriate: Retractions are generally not appropriate if authorship is in dispute, but there is no reason to doubt the validity of the results, if the main findings of the work are still reliable and a correction could address the errors or concerns, or if the editor has inconclusive evidence to support retraction. 
• Purpose of Retraction: The main purpose of retraction is to correct the literature and ensure its integrity, rather than to punish the authors.

Transportes adopts the following guidelines for the correction of errors in already published articles:

• Error Identification:

• The author or reader who identifies a significant error must immediately notify the journal's editor-in-chief.
• Clearly detail the nature of the error and its implications for the study.

• Error Assessment:

• The editor will assess the severity of the error and decide if a correction is necessary.
• Consult the authors and, if necessary, reviewers for an accurate assessment.

• Formal Correction (Erratum):

• If the error is minor and does not affect the results or conclusions, Transportes will publish an erratum.
• The erratum should be clear, detailed, and linked to the original article.

• Corrective Correction (Corrigendum):

• For errors that significantly impact the interpretation of the results, Transportes will publish a corrigendum.
• The corrigendum should include details of the error, the correction, and an explanation of how the correction affects the results or conclusions.

• Article Retraction:

• If the error compromises the integrity of the study (e.g., falsified data), Transportes will proceed with the retraction of the article.
• Transportes will publish a retraction notice, detailing the reasons and linking it to the original article.

• Transparency and Communication:

• Corrections must be communicated transparently to readers.
• Correction publications should be clearly identified and accessible.

• Ethical Implications and Conflicts of Interest:

• Transportes will ensure that all conflicts of interest are declared in the correction.
• Transportes follows the ethical guidelines of COPE and other relevant organizations.

Inclusive language

Inclusive language recognizes and respects diversity, conveys respect to all individuals, is sensitive to differences, and promotes equal opportunities.

The manuscript should use inclusive language throughout the text and should not make assumptions about the beliefs or values of any reader. It should not contain anything that might imply the superiority of one individual over another based on age, sex, race, ethnicity, culture, sexual orientation, disability, or health condition.

Authors should ensure that the writing is free of prejudices, stereotypes, slang, references to the dominant culture, and/or cultural assumptions. It is recommended to seek gender neutrality by using plural nouns (e.g., participants, users, travelers, etc.) whenever possible, to avoid the use of “he, she” or “he/she”. Descriptors that refer to personal attributes such as age, gender, race, ethnicity, culture, sexual orientation, disability, or health condition should be avoided unless they are relevant and justifiable.

Publication ethics and related editorial policies

Transportes is committed to ensuring the highest standard of ethics in the articles it evaluates and publishes. It understands that achieving this requires the collaboration and commitment of all parties involved in the process. To this end, it adheres to the principles of transparency and good practices in academic publications set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and requires that editors, reviewers, and authors conduct themselves according to international principles of conduct and good editorial practices, based on the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Authors, editors, and reviewers are required to adhere to the following ethical conduct guidelines and good editorial practices adopted by Transportes. 

Authors’ Responsibilities

• Before submitting the manuscript, familiarize yourself with the authors' guidelines and the focus and scope of Transportes.
  
  
• Accurately and concisely present the data, relevant procedures, and results of your research.
  
  
• Explicitly disclose any potential conflicts of interest at the time of manuscript submission, even if incidental. This should be included in a dedicated "Conflicts of Interest" section in the manuscript.
  
  
• Clearly indicate sponsors and sources of funding (both direct and indirect).
  
  
• Ensure that:
• the submitted manuscript is original and unpublished; 
• the manuscript has not been submitted nor is under review simultaneously by any other journal or scientific publication; 
• the editor-in-chief is alerted, at the time of submission, if the text is identical or substantially similar to another already published or submitted for publication elsewhere; 
• the text does not contain any plagiarized sections and that all credits to non-public domain ideas and formulations are given, citing the sources of fragments of texts from other works; 
• permissions for the use of images not created by the authors have been obtained from their authors or copyright holders and are available to the editors of Transportes; and 
• each author is responsible for the entire content of the manuscript unless the text clearly and explicitly states the limits of their contribution.
  
  
• Limit authorship to those who have significantly contributed to the conception and development of the work (see the Authorship Determination section), indicating each author’s contribution according to the Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT).
  
  
• If asked to recommend reviewers for the manuscript, authors should refrain from suggesting individuals with whom they have personal or professional relationships, or who may represent a conflict of interest or bias.
  
  
• Inform the editors of Transportes about the need to correct any published information if errors or inaccuracies are identified in the published text.
  
  
• Review the text considering the relevance of the reviewers' comments and recommendations, aiming to address them as best as possible, and explaining to the editor the reasons for any non-compliance.

Editors’ Responsibilities

• Uphold high standards for manuscripts accepted for publication based on their originality, contribution, accuracy, depth, and relevance.
  
  
• Guarantee that all manuscripts are evaluated through an efficient, anonymous, fair, and impartial process, ensuring that race, sex, sexual orientation, religion, ethnicity, nationality, or ideological position are not considered in the evaluation process.
  
  
• Conduct a preliminary review of submitted manuscripts to ensure their alignment with the journal's focus and scope, and check for any instances of plagiarism or self-plagiarism using anti-plagiarism software.
  
  
• Avoid real or apparent conflicts of interest by selecting reviewers who have no conflicts of interest or bias (favorable or unfavorable) regarding the authors or the subject matter of the manuscript.
  
  
• Refrain from overseeing the review of manuscripts in which they are co-authors or have conflicts of interest, returning them immediately to the editor-in-chief.
  
  
• Decide on the acceptance or rejection of evaluated manuscripts based on the reviews received, the journal's focus and scope, the authors' guidelines, and the originality, contribution, accuracy, depth, and relevance of the manuscript.
  
  
• Protect the intellectual property and rights of authors.
  
  
• Maintain the confidentiality of the review process, ensuring that information about the authors and reviewers of the manuscripts is not disclosed to third parties.
  
  
• If an editor receives convincing evidence that the substance, content, results, conclusions, or any other parts of a published article contain errors, they should notify the authors and arrange for the publication of an erratum or a commentary identifying and/or correcting the errors.
  
  
• If there is convincing evidence that a manuscript submitted for publication or a published article contains plagiarized material or falsified data, the editor should forward this evidence to the editor-in-chief to initiate an investigation according to the process established in the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
  
  
• Strictly adhere to the guidelines set forth by COPE.

Reviewers’ Responsibilities

• Uphold high standards for manuscripts recommended for publication, ensuring they are based on their originality, contribution, depth, and relevance.
  
  
• Evaluate all manuscripts anonymously, fairly, impartially, and based on scientific arguments, ensuring that race, sex, sexual orientation, religion, ethnicity, nationality, or ideological position do not influence the assessment of the merits of the manuscripts under review.
  
  
• Explain the basis of their evaluation and recommendation (accompanied by references, if applicable) so that the editor and authors can easily understand the comments and critiques of the review.
  
  
• Immediately decline the invitation to review a manuscript if they are not available to complete the evaluation within the specified timeframe or if they do not feel sufficiently qualified to review the manuscript due to the topic addressed.
  
  
• Avoid real or apparent conflicts of interest by returning manuscripts that present a potential conflict of interest or if the reviewer has any bias (favorable or unfavorable) regarding the authors or the subject matter of the manuscript.
  
  
• Immediately inform the responsible editor if they receive a manuscript authored or co-authored by someone with whom the reviewer has a personal or professional relationship.
  
  
• Preserve the confidentiality of manuscripts and the entire review process. Reviewers should treat each manuscript as a confidential document, refraining from discussing or showing it to others, except when needing specialized opinion to evaluate a specific aspect of the manuscript. In such cases, the reviewer should request that the discussion remains private and confidential and, if necessary, notify the editor in charge of the manuscript evaluation.
  
  
• Refrain from using privileged information for personal gain, including in their own research and/or publications.
  
  
• Immediately notify the responsible editor if they become aware of texts published or submitted to other publication outlets that have significant similarity to the work under review.
  
  
• If a reviewer has conclusive evidence that a manuscript contains plagiarized material or falsified data, they should immediately notify the responsible editor, providing the evidence. Under no circumstances should the reviewer directly contact the authors of the manuscript in question.
  
  
• Strictly adhere to the guidelines set forth by COPE.

Editorial board submissions

Manuscripts authored by members of the editorial board are treated like any other manuscript, without exception. At no point during the review process does the editor who is a co-author of the manuscript have access to the reviewers or any part of the review process. Even after the articles are published (if selected for publication), the co-author editor does not gain access to the review process details.