Peer Review System

Peer Review System

The journal operates under a double-blind peer review system, through which the anonymity of both authors and reviewers is preserved throughout all stages of the evaluation process. This mechanism ensures conditions of fairness, objectivity, editorial independence, and academic rigor in the assessment of submitted manuscripts.

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial editorial screening, aimed at verifying their alignment with the journal’s scope and focus, compliance with editorial and formatting guidelines, as well as the originality of the content and the absence of plagiarism or other inappropriate practices.

Once this stage is successfully completed, manuscripts are generally sent to two external and independent reviewers. The peer review process is conducted entirely outside the publishing institution. Reviewers have no academic, professional, or institutional relationships with the authors or the editorial team, ensuring the absence of conflicts of interest.

Reviewer Selection

Reviewers are selected based on the following criteria:

One reviewer with specific and demonstrated expertise in the main subject of the manuscript.

A second reviewer from a related or complementary disciplinary field, in order to ensure both technical depth and clarity of presentation, as well as scientific relevance and interdisciplinary coherence.

In the case of highly specialized manuscripts, the evaluation may be conducted by an external expert reviewer together with an academic editor with expertise in the subject area, while maintaining full editorial independence.

Reviews must be conducted from a critical, objective, ethical, and constructive perspective, aimed at strengthening the scientific contribution of the manuscript and improving its academic quality.

All submitted manuscripts are treated as strictly confidential. Reviewers commit not to disclose, reuse, or derive any direct or indirect benefit from the evaluated content. If external consultation is required to verify specific technical aspects, this must be previously communicated and authorized by the editorial team.

Stages and Timeline of the Review Process

Manuscript Submission
Upon submission, the author receives an automatic email confirmation and is assigned a unique reference number for tracking the editorial process.

Initial Editorial Screening
The Editor-in-Chief or a designated editor conducts a preliminary review to verify:

– Alignment with the journal’s scope and focus
– Compliance with editorial and formatting standards
– Originality and relevance of the content

This stage typically takes between 7 and 15 days. If the manuscript is rejected at this stage, the author will be notified promptly.

Double-Blind Peer Review
Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are sent for external review under a double-blind system.

The estimated timeframe for this stage, including the first editorial decision, is 20 to 45 days.

Decision and Request for Revisions
If revisions are required, the author receives the full reports from both reviewers and the editor.

The revised version must be submitted within a maximum period of 15 days, accompanied by a detailed response to each comment.

Additional Review Rounds
In cases of substantial discrepancies between reviewer reports, the Editor may request the evaluation of a third external reviewer.

If a second round of review is required, it will preferably be conducted by the same reviewers involved in the initial evaluation.

Final Decision
The final decision regarding acceptance or rejection rests with the responsible Editor, who will consider the reviewers’ reports comprehensively.

Publication
Accepted articles proceed to the stages of copyediting, proofreading, layout, and publication, typically within 10 to 20 days after final acceptance.

At this stage, the corresponding DOI is assigned, and the articles are submitted to relevant indexing and registration systems