Submission and double-anonymous peer review

On receiving a manuscript, the Editorial Committee conducts an initial assessment based on the following criteria:

• Objectives: The submission must state its objectives clearly and address them coherently.
• Theoretical and methodological rigor: The text must present a clearly defined and developed theoretical framework and methodology.
• Quality and relevance of the topic: The topic is pertinent to the current context, and the need for and significance of the research are explained.
• Clarity, terminology, and academic style: The manuscript must be clear and well structured and use terminology appropriate to its field.
• Relevance and currency of references: References must be used appropriately, be current and relevant, and contribute to the research presented.

Stages of double-anonymous peer review:

• Editorial compliance check: Within 15 working days of receipt, the editorial team checks each manuscript against the journal's requirements. If revisions are needed, the corresponding author is notified by email, and communication continues throughout the review process (first review round).
• Author revisions to meet editorial requirements: 5 working days (editorial assistants; first review round).
• Reviewer invitations: Associate Editors invite subject specialists by email. Time allowed: 10 working days.
• 1. Response to an invitation: A prospective reviewer has 5 working days to accept or decline.
• 2. Reviewer self-nomination: If a reviewer volunteers by email, the Editorial Assistants will decide whether to accept the offer based on the reviewer's CV and the issue's topics within 3 days.
• Sending the manuscript to reviewers: Within 3 days after reviewers accept, Editorial Assistants prepare and send the files (start of the second review round).
• 1. Review period: The two reviewers have 10 working days from the Editorial Committee's dispatch of the manuscript to submit their evaluations.
• Review decisions:
• Accept without revisions.
• Accept with revisions.
• Reject, with the option to reconsider after revisions (requiring another review); or reject definitively if serious shortcomings have not been remedied.

If one reviewer recommends rejection and the other recommends publication with revisions, a third reviewer will be invited to resolve the disagreement. The same time limits apply: 5 days for invitation, 5 days for response, and 10 days for review.

• Requesting author revisions: Within 5 working days of receiving the reviews, the editorial team sends the revision request by email (editorial assistants; third review round).
• Awaiting the revised manuscript: 10 working days (editorial assistants; third review round).
• Sending the revised manuscript back to reviewers: The two reviewers have 10 working days to verify the revisions and approve or reject publication. Their decision is final (editorial assistants and Associate Editors; third review round).
• Decision notification and production: The Editorial Committee Director formally informs the corresponding author of the final decision and sends acknowledgments to reviewers. The Editorial Team then copyedits, edits, lays out, and publishes the article in the relevant issue.

Peer-review workflow

ROLES

Editorial Director:

Oversees the entire editorial process, including assessment of fit, peer review, layout, and ongoing management.

Editorial Coordinator:

Coordinates the peer-review process.