Peer review process

ANONYMOUS EXTERNAL PEER REVIEW

The Editorial Committee of the journal, once it has verified that an article complies with the Submission Guidelines, will send the article to two anonymous expert reviewers from outside the Editorial Committee, within the specific subject area of the article, according to the double-blind model.

The evaluation, following a form established for reviewers, will focus on the interest of the article, its contribution to the knowledge of the subject matter, the novelties provided, the appropriate relationships established, the critical appraisal, the bibliographical references, its correct writing, etc., which can be summarised in the triad interest - rigor - novelty. The evaluator’s judgement as to whether or not it should be published will be indicated on a quantitative scale, as well as the modification requirements, if any, qualified as major or minor.

The editorial team will communicate the reasoned result of the evaluation to the main author or the authors’ representative by email, attaching the review reports. The result of the review can be: publication without changes, publication with minor modifications, publication conditioned to important modifications, or not considered for publication, in all cases complemented with the observations and comments considered pertinent.

If the manuscript has been accepted with minor modifications, the authors must resubmit a new version of the article, considering the demands and suggestions of the external reviewers and the Editorial Committee. In the case of major modifications and depending on the degree of compliance with the requested changes within the available deadlines, the Editorial Committee will decide whether to publish the article.