GUIDELINES FOR THE REVIEWER

The evaluation process of articles is double blind, involving experts in the area of knowledge and topics of the journal, external to the publishing institution, selected according to: the number of publications related to the study, which have been published in high impact indexed journals, which demonstrate independence from the authors in terms of research or institutional association and have at least a doctoral degree.  The referee determines based on the criteria established in the FORMAT FOR ARTICLE EVALUATION - ENTRAMADO - UNIVERSIDAD LIBRE, if the document:

  • Can be published without modification
  • Can be published with modifications of the proofreader
  • Can be published with minor modifications
  • It can be published with major modifications that imply new evaluation.
  • It must be rejected and submitted in a future call

The form used for the qualification or evaluation of the manuscript can be downloaded here.

Recommendations for completing the evaluation forms 

  1. The observations, judgements and recommendations made shall be substantiated and adequately explained.
  2. Be careful with the use of language, avoid expressions that may lead to misinterpretations.
  3. There must be consistency between the assessment made of the manuscript and the recommendation for its publication.
  4. Manuscripts should be rejected when:
  • The writing and grammatical composition is deficient.
  • Its scientific interest and relevance is null or scarce, only descriptive or informative.
  • The contributions are not significant of application, informative, formative, methodological, within its area of knowledge.
  • There is no evidence of methodological and argumentative coherence
  • Methodological errors compromise the validity of its content.
  • There is no evidence of adequate theoretical foundation with respect to the subject matter.
  • The unpublished character is not recognized.
  • The pertinence and quality of the sources and the bibliography used are not verified.
  • There is no evidence of interest on the part of the potential public and of international dissemination.

The reviewer of ENTRAMADO must:

  • Be attentive to resolve the concerns presented by the editors regarding the publication of the authors.
  • Treat the manuscript with the commitment of confidentiality that is expected in this type of evaluation of original material: without plagiarizing it, retain it, copy it. Evaluators must inform the editor of any conflict of interest that prevents them from objectively evaluating the text.
  • Send the result of the evaluation within 20 calendar days of receipt.

Reviewers are encouraged to consult Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing  https://publicationethics.org/files/cope-ethical-guidelines-peer-reviewers-v2_0.pdf