The journal uses a content review procedure carried out by a selected group of expert peers who will verify the high academic and scientific quality of the articles submitted for consideration.

Manuscripts must successfully pass the academic review process, which uses a double-blind peer review method, where the identities of both the authors and the reviewers/evaluators remain strictly anonymous.

• Manuscripts that pass the editorial team’s initial screening will be sent to academic experts in the same field, discipline, and subject matter as the submitted work. The selected reviewers will be specialists from national and international institutions, who will provide feedback on the relevance and academic quality of the proposed manuscript and determine its suitability for publication.
• All manuscripts will be sent to two experts—affiliated with institutions different from those of the authors—who will issue their evaluations.
• In the case of differing evaluations, the manuscript will be sent to a third reviewer to resolve the discrepancy. Finally, based on the reviewers’ recommendations, the editorial team will make the final publication decision.

For a manuscript to be approved for publication, the following is required:

1. At least two out of the three reviewers must issue positive evaluations.

2. The editorial team will ensure that all feedback provided to the authors includes solid arguments supporting the editorial decision.

3. The results of the academic review process are final and binding.

4. If an article is accepted with conditions for modification, the author will have thirty (30) calendar days to submit the revised version to the editorial team. If this deadline is not met, the document will begin a new review process.

5. The time it takes for a document to be sent for review will depend on the number of articles in the waiting list. Once reviewers/evaluators receive the article, they will have five weeks to complete the review and submit their evaluations.

6. Accepted manuscripts will begin the editing process.

7. Once the editorial process (style correction, metadata tagging, formatting, and layout) is completed, the preliminary version of the article will be sent to the author for final review and approval. The author will have three (3) business days to confirm final approval for publication.

Author responsibilities:

• Research must be conducted in accordance with ethical standards and the current regulations governing responsible management of copyright.

• Researchers must present their findings clearly, honestly, and without falsification or improper data manipulation.

• Researchers must comply with the publication requirements established by the journal.

• Researchers must ensure the originality of the manuscript, avoid simultaneous submission to other platforms, and prevent plagiarism or other unethical practices.

• Authors must guarantee that if they have used the work and/or words of others, proper citation is provided.

• Authors are responsible for the accuracy of the results presented and published.

• Authorship should accurately reflect the contributions of all involved parties.

• Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right to be the first publisher of the work.

• The primary author(s) must ensure that all co-authors are included in the article, that all have reviewed and approved the final version, and have agreed to its submission for publication from the outset.

• If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, they are obligated to immediately notify the journal’s editor or editorial coordinator and cooperate in retracting or correcting the article.

Editorial Team Responsibilities:

• Responsible for the selection and publication process of articles.

• Must remain impartial in the selection of peer reviewers.

• Must adopt editorial policies that promote transparency and good editorial practices.

• Committed to keeping authors informed about the selection process and review outcomes.

• Must protect the integrity of published documents and make necessary corrections or retractions.

• Must provide all necessary information to reviewers and authors to enable effective performance of their roles.

• Must establish clear procedures for resolving conflicts of interest.

• Must verify authorship and reject articles involving plagiarism, citation manipulation, data fabrication, or any other form of misconduct.

• Committed to promoting idea exchange, respecting differing opinions, and ensuring freedom of opinion and expression throughout the submission, selection, review, and publication processes.

• Must ensure that manuscripts do not contain false or defamatory information about individuals, groups, or organizations.

• Must continually improve the journal by ensuring the quality of published material and promoting academic and scientific standards.

• The editor is committed to ensuring confidentiality in the review process and must not disclose authors’ identities to reviewers.

• Editors must make fair and impartial decisions and ensure a review process based on transparency and best practices.

• They will implement all necessary measures to ensure that article contents remain confidential throughout the pre-publication process. The editor will not disclose information about manuscripts under peer review to third parties.

Reviewer and/or evaluator responsibilities:

• Reviewers are responsible for analyzing the academic, theoretical, and methodological relevance of each article or essay assigned to them.

• Reviewers must express their opinions clearly and with valid arguments.

• They are responsible for ensuring the presence of a theoretical-methodological section, its consistency with the field of study, the coherence between the academic contribution and the relevance of the findings, and the timeliness and appropriateness of the cited bibliography.

• They are committed to reporting any unethical behavior by authors and pointing out any information that may warrant rejection of the manuscript.

• Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of the information related to the manuscripts they evaluate. It must not be shown or discussed with others unless authorized by the editorial team.

• Any privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must remain confidential and may not be used for personal advantage.

• Reviewers must not evaluate manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest.

Reviewer guidelines and forms:

Form for scientific articles

Form for review articles

 

Sources:

https://revistas.uexternado.edu.co/index.php/ecoins/about/goodPractices#:~:text=Los%20editores%20son%20responsables%20del,editoriales%20que%20fomenten%20la%20transparencia

https://revistas.anahuac.mx/index.php/the_anahuac_journal/Proceso_Evaluacion_por_pares