Editorial Policies

Editorial Policies

Articles
This section includes the results of original research; the sequence will be as follows: title, abstract in Spanish or Portuguese and English, keywords in Spanish or Portuguese and English, introduction, methodological development of the research, and conclusions.

About the Authors
Brief biographical notes of the authors publishing in the current issue (100-150 words).

Peer Review Process
To ensure the quality of the content, all articles undergo a plagiarism prevention process using CrossRef's Similarity Check software; however, the review and evaluation of potential plagiarism will be the responsibility and decision of the editor-in-chief, who will communicate the situation to the author to determine whether plagiarism has occurred.

All articles undergo blind peer review, a process that guarantees the anonymity of both the author and the reviewers. Each article is reviewed by at least two expert reviewers within a maximum of four weeks from the date they receive the text and the review form.

The reviewers meet the following requirements:

- They hold the same academic degree as the author.
- Their research area aligns with that of the article.
- They may not review or evaluate more than one article in the same issue.
- They belong to a university.
- They do not belong to the publishing institution.

The review process consists of an in-depth evaluation of the article and primarily considers the following aspects:

REVIEW FORM

Reviewer Information
Reviewed by:
Educational Level:
Bachelor's ( ) Master's ( ) Doctorate ( ) Postdoctoral ( )
Specialization:
Research Areas:

Article Title:

REVIEW

Relevance of the Topic
Observations regarding Formal Structure (coherence, organization, language used, writing style)
Observations regarding Theoretical/Methodological Treatment
Other (attach any comments you deem necessary)
I consider the work to be:
a) Publishable (without objections)
b) Publishable (with some modifications, see 5.1)

-With technical review of the formal aspects

-With substantial theoretical and methodological changes
c) Not publishable

5.1 If publication of the article is conditional, do you wish to review the second version?

a) Yes, I will review the second version within two weeks.

b) No, I prefer that the Editorial Committee review the second version.

Final considerations supporting your opinion
Reviewer's signature
Date of submission of the review

If the review requests modifications to the article, these will be sent to the author. Once the author submits the corrected version, it will preferably be sent back to the same reviewer for approval, if applicable. If the reviewer prefers, the editorial board may conduct a second review. This second review will examine the incorporation of the suggested modifications. In the event that an article receives one favorable and one unfavorable review, it is suggested that the article undergo a third, blind peer review.

Open Access Contribution
To establish open access as a meritorious practice, the active commitment of each and every person who produces scientific knowledge and maintains cultural heritage is ideally required. Open access contributions include the results of original scientific research, primary data and metadata, source materials, digital representations of graphic and pictorial materials, and scholarly multimedia materials. Open access contributions must meet two conditions:
1. Authors and copyright holders of such contributions must guarantee all users, equally, the free, irrevocable, and worldwide right to access a scholarly work, as well as the license to copy, use, distribute, transmit, and publicly display it, and to make and distribute derivative works, in any digital medium for any responsible purpose, all subject to appropriate attribution (community standards will continue to provide mechanisms for enforcing appropriate attribution and responsible use of published works, as is currently done), as well as the right to make small print copies for personal use.

2. A complete version of the work and all its accompanying materials, including a copy of the permission mentioned above, in a convenient standard electronic format, is deposited (and thus published) in at least one online repository that uses acceptable technical standards (such as Open Access definitions) and is supported and maintained by an academic institution, scholarly society, government agency, or established organization that seeks to implement open access, unrestricted distribution, interoperability, and long-term archiving.

Learn more about open access and the Berlin Declaration that guides our work: https://openaccess.mpg.de/Berlin-Declaration