directrices para el revisor

Guidelines for the reviewer

The evaluation of the articles postulated for publication in the Journal consists of four moments: (1) Reception; (2) Initial evaluation; (3) Evaluation of Academic Pairs and (4) Final Selection for Publication.

  1. Reception: begins with the submission of manuscripts by the authors as of the application of the call. The texts should be sent to the email of the publication. Along with the material, the cession of rights and the declaration of originality must be sent, the texts presented must be unpublished, original, and not submitted to an arbitration process in another publication.
  2. Initial evaluation: it implies the review and evaluation by the members of the Editorial Committee and the Editor, in this first evaluation it is indicated the relevance of the document and the compliance with the editorial guidelines.
  3. Evaluation of Academic Pairs: each article that obtains a favorable conceptualization in the initial evaluation, will be sent to external academic evaluators in order to render a concept about them. Likewise, the pairs will not have knowledge of the author or authors to be evaluated (Double blind method). At least 60% of the referees employed in each issue of the Journal will be external to the Free University.

3.1 The concepts issued by peer reviewers in relation to the articles examined may generate as a result: (a) Approved; (b) Approved with modifications; (c) Rejected.

3.2 The items that the referee must qualify to offer the concept of evaluation are the ones provided in the evaluation instrument that the Scientific and Editorial Committee of the Journal has for that purpose. The mentioned items will have a rating on a scale of 1 to 10, in which 1 will be the minimum level of quality or compliance and 10 its total compliance and quality.

  1. Peer evaluation may be consulted by the author of the text at any time.
  2. The corrections must be made within the term of ten (10) days counted from the day following the submission of the original concept. After said period, if information is received, it will be understood that the article has been withdrawn by the author of the process. If considered appropriate, you may request that the text be left for the next edition in order to establish a longer period to make the modifications, which will be determined and communicated by the Editor.
  3. The selection of the pairs is carried out according to the levels of study, recent publications and thematic specialty, in agreement with the bank that holds the Journal for that purpose.
  4. The selected pairs, once they know the article entrusted for their evaluation, must state the existence of conflicts of interest that prevent their objective evaluation, so that the Editorial Board of the Journal decides definitively on its impartiality. The circumstances that may give rise to the declaration of conflict of interest may be, among others:
  • The existence of links of consanguinity with the author, affinity or civilians with the author.
  • Enmity with the author.
  • To have known as an evaluator, director or tutor the investigation of which the research article results.
  1. With the acceptance of your order, the arbitrators undertake to maintain total confidentiality with respect to the data, results or any other finding that by virtue of their work as evaluators of the article become knowledgeable. For the above and in accordance with the Committee on Ethics in Publications reviewers may not make use of the arguments, data or any other discovery contained in the articles until they are published, always observing and retaining respect for the regulations on copyright. .
  2. The evaluating peer who, in the exercise of his assignment, knows, detects or recognizes a possible plagiarism should inform the Editor so that he can carry out the actions to which there is agreement with the regulation for authors.

In case an article is objected or rejected by its peers, the journal will inform the author of the results of the evaluation.