Peer Review Policies

The articles will be accepted through a peer review by experts on the subject, external to the Editorial Committee. This review Will be single-blind. Articles sent for review will be confidential during the process; that is why the reviewer will not be able to spread, comment, or use the information included.

 

In addition to evaluating the originality and authenticity of the article, the reviewer must report flaws in the text if they are found. Failure to comply with this last point would be a severe fault.

 

If the reviewer reports any conflict of interest, the editorial committee reserves the possibility of exempting him from evaluating the article.

 

Peer Review Process Details

1. The document is sent to the journal using the OJS platform. The author is responsible for the complete submission following the journal's guidelines.
2. The editor-in-chief receives the manuscript. The editor-in-chief verifies the manuscript's relevance according to the journal's focus and scope and the guidelines for authors. The manuscript will only continue the peer review process if the mínimum relevance requirements are met. The manuscript will also be rejected if a similarity percentage greater than 20% is verified with another online document. In this step, the editor-in-chief can provide additional recommendations if they consider it pertinent to continue with the editorial process.
3. The editor-in-chief appoints an associate editor based on the manuscript's subject and availability. The associate editor will monitor the article during the peer review until the editorial phase. The editor-in-chief can also cover this function depending on the thematic scope of the article.
4. The associate editor appoints a minimum of two reviewers per article.
5. The reviewers analyze the document; a file for reviewers will be provided as a reference; it is also possible to receive additional comments using the OJS. At the end of this process, reviewers must provide a recommendation on the manuscript, which may be: a) accept this submission, b) publishable with modifications, c) resubmit for review, d) resubmit to another publication, e) not publishable, or e ) see comments (these must be detailed in the system). The reviewers will send this verdict through the OJS platform unless, for justifiable reasons, they cannot use it. In the latter case, the associated editor responsible for the article will be notified directly. Reviewers will be given 15 days to carry out this process.
6. When appropriate, the associated editor will contact the author through the platform, indicating that they have 15 days to resolve any comments. The communication and delivery of the corrections must be done through the OJS unless they cannot use this platform for justifiable reasons.
7. Once the corrections are received, the associated editor responsible for the article will verify the corrections made; If it is necessary (especially in the case of major corrections), the editor-in-chief can contact the reviewers again to verify the correctness of the manuscripts. The associated editor can request corrections from the authors as often as necessary.
8. Based on the corrections, the editor responsible for the article must select the final decision that can be a) accept the submission or b) not publish.
9. The peer review process is over once the final decisión is made. Each time the manuscript has been accepted for publication, the editor-in-chief will be in charge of the subsequent processes that include a) the English and Spanish style review and b) the final layout of the manuscript.

A summary of the peer review process can be seen in the following table:

Responsible	Process
Editor in chief:	Reception, review of relevance and (when appropriate) assignment of the editor responsible for the article.
Associated editor:	Submission of article to reviewers
Reviewers:	Review of the manuscript and first decision.
Associated editor:	Reception of reviews and communication with the author. Final decision.