Peer review process

All manuscripts are initially submitted to an editorial review, which consists of verifying that the work corresponds to the theme of the relevant call for papers and complies with all established guidelines.

Subsequently, the articles undergo a double-blind peer review process by two members of the journal's panel of reviewers, comprised of prestigious academics from national and international institutions. The reviewers are selected by the issue coordinators and ratified by the editor-in-chief.

The reviewers must formally accept the review and adhere to the stipulated deadlines, evaluating the manuscripts for originality, coherence, structure, methodological rigor, consistency between methods, results, and conclusions, relevance of the topic, and sufficiency of the sources, following the established evaluation format.

All submissions will be reviewed by peers external to the authors' affiliated institution.

The resolutions of the peer review process are: approved for publication without changes; approved for publication with minor changes; and requires revision.

If either of the two reviews indicates "requires revision," the manuscript will be sent for a third, final review.

If both reviews indicate "requires revision," the manuscript will be automatically rejected.

The review decisions are final.

When a manuscript needs to be resubmitted after revisions, the validation of the changes will be the responsibility of the editor-in-chief, the issue coordinators, and the reviewers.

The duration of the peer review process is determined by the dates stipulated in the current call for papers and the number of articles on the waiting list.

At the authors' request, the journal's editorial board will keep them informed of the progress of their work in the peer review and editing process.