ISSN 1984-6657 Online version

INSTRUCTIONS FOR AUTHORS

The rPOT is a specialized journal dedicated to publishing original works, whether theoretical or empirical, relating to all sub-areas of the Psychology of Work and of Organizations. Experience reports aimed at the professional public are also accepted. All contributions must be properly substantiated and oriented according to the instructions listed here. To illustrate, the sub-areas mentioned above and their respective topic areas include:

Well-being in Organizations

• ·       Employee well-being
• ·       Positive emotions at work
• ·       Motivation and meaning of work
• ·       Quality of life at work
• ·       Resilience and work
• ·       Support and work
• ·       Other topics on Well-being in Organizations
• 
   
• Organizational and Consumer Behavior
• ·       Citizenship, trust, and fairness
• ·       Climate, culture, and values
• ·       Consumer behavior
• ·       Organizational commitment
• ·       Conflict, leadership, and power
• ·       Groups and teams
• ·       Other topics on Organizational and Consumer Behavior

      People Development

• ·       Organizational learning
• ·       Coaching
• ·       Competence and performance
• ·       Knowledge management
• ·       Training support
• ·       Training, development, and education
• ·       Other topics on People Development

 
People Management

• ·       Performance evaluation
• ·       Career and retirement
• ·       Competence and performance
• ·       Organizational strategy
• ·       Recruitment and selection
• ·       Compensation and benefits
• ·       Other topics on People Management

Subjectivity and Work Context

• ·       Harassment
• ·       Burnout and stress
• ·       Activity ergonomics
• ·       Subject-activity-organization interaction
• ·       Pleasure and suffering at work
• ·       Insecurity in work relationships and conditions
• ·       Other topics on Subjectivity and Work Context

 
Contributions accepted and their basic structure

Empirical Research Reports. Works derived from original empirical research, whether descriptive or predictive, with or without hypothesis testing. This type of contribution should have, necessarily and exclusively, the following sections: introduction, research problem, the objectives of the work, theoretical-conceptual basis for its conduct, hypotheses and/or guiding questions; method, with the subsections: participants, instrument(s), data collection procedures and ethical considerations, data analysis procedures; results, the findings of the study, consistent with its objectives, hypotheses/guiding questions; discussion, interpretation of the main findings, summary, and conclusion, as well as limitations and implications of the study. It is required that at least 40% of all references must have been produced within the last five years. Limited to 30 pages.

Literature Reviews. Summaries of a broad and relevant set of productions available in the literature of the area. This consists, essentially, of critical evaluations, propositions, on given issues, summarizing previous research, presenting the state of the art, identifying gaps/issues to be explored, suggesting further steps in the investigation of a particular subject. Quantitative procedures are used in meta-analyses to statistically combine results of studies. This type of contribution must have, necessarily and exclusively, the following sections: introduction, problem, reason/relevance of developing the article, as well as its objectives; method, clearly presenting the corpus used, the procedures for inclusion and exclusion of studies (with a description of searches conducted and period covered), and collection and analysis procedures; results, the findings of the study, consistent with its objectives and guiding questions; anddiscussion, with the implications of the review for the study of the subject. It is required that at least 50% of all references must have been produced within the last five years. Limited to 30 pages.

Theoretical Essays. Must present a theoretical or methodological problem with logical exposition and defense of a "thesis". Based on a rigorous argument, the author must express, with sound reasoning, his/her personal judgment regarding the proposed problem, indicating possible new approaches or solutions. Here there is more latitude in terms of structure. However, it is suggested that the sections include: introduction, defines the problem and the study objectives;method, with the logical structure (how the author developed the concepts and arguments); the equivalent ofresults/discussion, where consistent and logical subsections may be adopted, with the synthesis of the work, and its main implications and future proposals. It is required that at least 40% of all references must have been produced during the last five years. Limited to 25 pages.

Reviews. Should cover critical reviews of Brazilian works (published up to 2 years prior) or foreign works (published up to 5 years prior) guiding the reader regarding their characteristics and potential uses. Should go beyond a mere summary of the chapters, offering a critical assessment of the work, pointing out the possible contributions to the field of Psychology of Organizations and of Work. Limited to 4-7 pages.

Professional Experience Reports. Case study, with methodologically appropriate evidence, describing new methods or techniques, as well as evaluating the results of the experience. This type of contribution should have the following sections: introduction, with a presentation of the case and its contextual aspects, theoretical basis, and objectives of the study; method, presenting to the reader the steps in carrying out the experience, a description of intervention procedures or strategies, the instruments or tools used; results/discussion, where consistent and logical subsections may be adopted, containing an analysis of implications of the experience and its contributions to practices in Psychology of Organizations and of Work. It is required that at least 40% of all references must have been produced during the last five years. Limited to 10-15 pages.

Debates. At the invitation of the rPOT, this method aims to promote dialogue and debate on current issues and topics of interest for the Psychology of Organizations and Work. The section consists of three different and complementary parts, written by authors invited by the rPOT. The invited authors include those known to adopt a favorable position on the guiding theme, others who hold a contrary position, and a third who plays the role of moderator. Limited to 7-10 pages.

Submission of manuscripts

The rPOT accepts articles in Portuguese, English, French, and Spanish, but assumes the cost of revision only for articles in Portuguese. Therefore, articles in other languages require an even more detailed review by the authors before sending the final version for publication.

The journal adopts, in full, the APA rules of style (Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, 6th edition, 2012).

Authors can refer to the Apa Style website <https://apastyle.apa.org/> as well as the Apa Style Blog for information on aspects of standard.

Specifically, direct quotations should be translated into the language of publication chosen by the authors.

The manuscript, in its entirety, should not exceed the maximum number of pages stipulated for the type of contribution (see the section "Contributions accepted and their basic structure"), including all text elements (references, figures, tables, drawings, etc.). The Title Page is considered as page 1. The page number should be set alone in the upper right corner.

The manuscript should be prepared in word processor format using Word for Windows 6.0 or higher. Double spacing, including references. The font throughout the text must be Times New Roman, size 12, should be used throughout the text, not exceeding, in any circumstances, the number of pages specified above. The page setup must be A4, with all margins 2.5 cm and a left indent.

The Title Page must contain, solely and exclusively, the following information, all centered on the page:

1.    Full title in Portuguese, between 10 and 12 words

2.    Suggested running head in Portuguese, not exceeding 5 words

3.    Full titles in English and Spanish, comparable to the title in Portuguese

4.    Suggested running heads in English and Spanish

Page 2 of the manuscript should contain the Resumo, which must be presented in a single paragraph, containing: a brief presentation of the problem; goals; method; main results; main implications. This must be limited to 150 words. Then provide three palavras-chaves. Immediately after the resumo, insert, without a page break theAbstract, an accurate translation of the resumo. At the end, provide three keywords.

After the Abstract, the Resumen should be presented, followed by three palabras claves. The keywords must be properly indexed in the BVS-PSI (VHL Psychology) or in other thesaurus systems such as MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) or APA, and have versions in the three languages.

After the Resumen page, the text itself should be presented. There is no need to write the word "Introduction". Tables, figures, and other macrotextual elements must be in the exact location defined by the authors, i.e., throughout the text. The References should follow the main text.

Every electronic reference must come with the Digital Object Identifier (DOI) or, in its absence, with the URL (Uniform Resource Locator). DOI wording should follow the standard recommended by CrossRef, which is: https://doi.org/10.000/000 (example), without the prefix “doi:” before.

References should come without specific formatting arising from the use of bibliographic management software.

Peer review process

All manuscripts submitted to the rPOT are considered according to a standard evaluation flow.

1. The manuscript is received first by the rPOT Editorial Support group. At this point, it will be verified that all the documents were sent via the system (Manuscript without author identification; Ethics Declaration Letter). An Associate Editor to whom the manuscript will be designated, is chosen according to subject and area of expertise. Once chosen, the Associate Editor does a preliminary assessment of the article, called a desk review. Two main sets of criteria are applied at that time.

a) Manuscript compatibility with the editorial policies of the rPOT, assessing its contribution to the area (content);

b) Acceptability of the format: manuscript structure, following the instructions in the present document; adhering to APA rules (sixth edition); size.

At this stage, the manuscript can receive two recommendations:

(1) rejected for inadequate focus and scope; OR rejected for inadequate content and/or form (in both cases, it will be archived);

(2) accepted for processing. Authors of rejected manuscripts may resubmit their work only once, indicating the required original manuscript code from the first submission. If, in the second submission, the problems already mentioned in the previous phase remain unresolved, the text will be rejected outright.

The author will receive the result of the desk review assessment in 90 days. 

2.   Manuscripts accepted by the desk review for processing will be sent to at least two ad hoc reviewers, preserving the anonymity of the process - double blind review. 

After the external evaluation process, the manuscript, together with the reviews received, will be considered again by the Associate Editor. At this point, the editor may choose to request new reviewer opinions, if deemed necessary. The process can have as its outcome:

1) a definite rejection of the manuscript;

2) the need for revisions, according to reviews;

3) acceptance with minor changes;

4) acceptance in the form submitted. The author will have access to the full content of the reviews given, or, as appropriate, may receive a consolidated review from the Editor.

If there are manuscripts in need of revisions,the author will have a maximum period, defined by the editor, to send them back to the journal. This period shall be a maximum of 30 days; this deadline being set by the editorial team of rPOT.

In the resubmission, the author must necessarily send two files:

1) a letter, showing on one hand what was requested by the reviewers, and on the other, his/her response (what was changed, or what was not changed, and why);

2) the reformulated manuscript, with the changes highlighted in yellow. Failure to comply with this requirement may lead to the archiving of the manuscript.

3. Final decision and beginning of the editorial production process. After receiving the reformulated version of the manuscript, the Associate Editor may or may not trigger a new round of evaluations - if so, preferably with the same reviewer from the first round. Then, in possession of the reviews of this recast version, a new review opinion (consolidated) may be drafted, with new change requests (for example, changes not made by the authors and considered essential), the manuscript may be rejected, or may be accepted outright. In the case of final acceptance, the author will be informed when the manuscript may be published (journal volume and issue number).

The editorial production process begins after final acceptance. The manuscript will then be subjected to language reviews, including abstract. Once layout is complete, the author will receive the manuscript for proofing. At this point, he/she should correct possible errors or identify possible adjustments for the layout designer. To complete these modifications / annotations, the author will be given two working days.   

Ethical aspects

All manuscripts submitted to the rPOT must be accompanied by a Declaration letter signed by all authors. In that letter, which can be accessed here, the authors must declare they have followed all the principles of ethics and integrity involved in carrying out the research which led to the manuscript. In the case of theoretical articles or literature reviews, authors must guarantee that they followed all integrity measures for the use of the intellectual property of others (according to the letter that can be obtained here).

Manuscripts that are evaluated by the rPOT Editorial Board as violating ethical principles will be summarily rejected, and the author will not be allowed to submit further manuscripts to the journal. For this reason, it is recommended that the author provide, when applicable, the following information when composing the text: ethical criteria involved in inviting participants; procedures for open participation in the study; ethical procedures for information handling and integrity; as well as other aspects recommended by the APA (Sixth Edition), and by the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics), to whose principles the rPOT adheres (http://publicationethics.org/).

Copyright notice

All opinions expressed in the manuscripts are the sole responsibility of the author. On submitting a manuscript to the rPOT, the author represents that:

1) this same manuscript is not under consideration in another periodical, national or otherwise;

2) he/she is willing to wait during the manuscript processing time, and is also aware that, once accepted, the manuscript may have to stay on hold due to the journal's rule of publishing only two (2) articles from authors at the same institution per edition, ensuring its geographical diversity;

3) once accepted, the article becomes the journal's property and may not be reproduced without its consent, which will be granted upon the author's written request.

Texts that contain excerpts from other publications must necessarily obey the limit of 500 words, to avoid constituting plagiarism, or self-plagiarism, or thus violating the principle of originality. Extreme caution is recommended in reproducing figures, tables, and other resources excerpted from third-party works. Should it be necessary, their publication will only be accepted by the journal if they come accompanied by a letter of authorization from the author/owner of the original work.

If the manuscript is accepted, the author must submit a copyright assignment letter, according to the model which can be obtained here. All authors must sign the same letter and send it to the email by which they were notified of final acceptance of the manuscript.

As part of the submission process, authors are required to check off their submission's compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.

• Have the authors signed the Ethics Declaration Letter?

• Does the manuscript have the appropriate number of pages for the type of contribution, counting from the title page? 

• Do the references obey the proportion of authorship during the past five years, according to the type of contribution?

• Does the manuscript present a structure strictly compatible with that expected by the journal, in accordance with the type of contribution? 

• Is the manuscript written in correct language, with logically organized sections, using arguments consistent and compatible with a scientific production?Does the manuscript follow APA standards, according to the 6th edition of its Manual? 

• Do the author notes present information about the author(s) and repeat their names and affiliations? 

• Were 3 keywords presented, properly indexed in the BVS-PSI and with versions in the three languages (Portuguese, English, and Spanish)? 

• Is the manuscript under consideration in another national periodical, or not? 

• Does the manuscript cite the articles in the list of references with the DOI number? 

• Once accepted, the article becomes the property of the journal, and may not be reproduced without its consent, which will be given at the author's written request