Responsibilities of the Editor/Editorial Direction and Editorial Board of the Portuguese Journal of Military Sciences (PJMS)
The Editors/Editorial Direction and the Editorial Board, whose members are recognized experts in the topics/field, are available at Editorial Direction – Portuguese Journal of Military Sciences (ium.pt)  and Advisory Board – Portuguese Journal of Military Sciences (ium.pt)).
The Editors/Editorial Direction of the Portuguese Journal of Military Sciences, in articulation with its Editorial Board assumptions, are responsible for:
  1. Conducting the first review of the manuscripts submitted and deciding which scientific papers/articles submitted to PJMS should be published, in accordance with the compliance of the:
    • The adoption of responsive measures reflected in “zero plagiarism”. All articles are checked for discrepancies using an automated software. Manuscripts violating these legal and academic criteria are rejected promptly. Suspected cases of malpractice or misconduct are dealt accordingly to COPE – Committee on Publication Ethics flowcharts (available at Full set of flowcharts.pdf (publicationethics.org)).
    • Copyright and Edition: Military University Institute of Portugal (Instituto Universitário Militar [IUM]). The publication of final accepted versions or published articles requires the permission of the PJMS Editor.
    • Favorable opinion of two external reviewers, under double-blind review. The favorable opinion can be expressed in terms of: “Accepted in its current form”, or “Accepted after some revision”.
    • An impartial assessment of the manuscript uniquely based on it’s intellectual, academic and adequacy to the area of military sciences, regardless the author(s)’ characteristics and origins (such as race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, military rank, etc.).
  1. Giving guidance to all parts involved in the process of publishing related to a characterization of the peer review process and what is expected from them. Specifically, guidance for:
  1. Guaranteeing a just, equitable, neutral and fair double-blind peer review of the manuscripts, as well as confidentiality of sensitive information that requires, of author(s) identity during the review, and reviewers identities throughout the entire process.
  2. Assuring the proper selection of the reviewers (uniquely based on their knowledge, expertise, area of interests, and related requirements, as well as availability in their agenda for that date).
  3. Creating, upholding and updating a database of fitting reviewers and revising it according to reviewer’ performance.
  4. Listing articles that overcome the peer-reviewing process according to their date of arrival and acceptance for publication.
  5. Making certain that:
    • Whenever necessary, apologies, elucidations, retractions, corrections, and amendments are published;
    • The editor can only use material presented in a submitted manuscript that was not published if the author clearly expresses his consent.