Arbitration policy
About the peer review process
Academic peer review of articles submitted for publication is an important procedure for estimating the quality of the manuscript and of the Graduate School Research Journal.
Before manuscripts are submitted to external reviewers, they may be rejected by the Editor, who will first evaluate if the format complies with the rules for authors or if the topic is outside the editorial line of the journal. This will occur within a maximum period of 1 week after being received, for which it will be communicated to the e-mail address of the authors.
Authors may send their article as a new manuscript once all the observations have been corrected. If the editorial team determines that the manuscript meets the minimum criteria, it may continue with peer review.
La revisión por pares
Los manuscritos recibidos en la revista, serán evaluados: por pares (peer revise), en la modalidad de doble ciego, lo que significa que la identidad y procedencia de los autores es de forma anónima y confidencial, quienes a través de la plataforma de la revista completarán la pauta de evaluación respectiva para el manuscrito, en caso de discrepancias en los informes de evaluación, se recurrirá a un tercer revisor bajo las mismas condiciones, con claridad, precisión, brevedad y originalidad de las investigaciones a fin de ser publicadas, los manuscritos científicos recibidos
La evaluación concluirá con un dictamen que indica si el manuscrito es.
- Rechazado
- Aceptado
- Aceptado con correcciones menores
- Aceptado con correcciones mayores
- Manuscrito aceptado sin correcciones
The decision of the peer reviewers will be informed by means of a letter sent through the authors' e-mail address. If the manuscript has the status of accepted with minor corrections, the author and/or co-authors will have a period of ten working days to send a new version with the modifications and/or clarifications, which should be highlighted in the main manuscript through Word (as a comment), which will be sent through e-mail, addressed to the Journal's Editorial Committee. The editors guarantee the anonymous arbitration process by mediating the interaction between authors and reviewers; these names are kept in electronic files until the end of the process.
Important: The journal counts on the collaboration of external reviewers outside the editorial team and the publishing institution.
Peer Review Procedure
The Section Editor invites review of the paper with qualified expert reviewers from the database or new to the article in question.
- The reviewer is invited with the abstract of the paper.
- The reviewer accepts or rejects the paper.
- An opinion is issued with recommendations to the author and the editor.
- They are sent to the author and the author makes and responds.
- They are sent to the reviewer and he/she returns to give his/her opinion.
Once accepted, it goes to the next editorial phase.
Timing
- There is a period of 1 week to accept the review.
- There is a reminder period in case you have not responded (1 week).
- There is a period of 3 weeks to carry out the review.
And a period of 1 week for exchange of revisions / corrections per event.
If the editorial team determines that the manuscript meets the minimum criteria to continue its review, two blind reviewers are assigned, who, through the Journal's platform complete the respective evaluation guideline for the research article. The journal uses double-blind peer review, i.e. the identity and origin of the authors is anonymous to the reviewers and vice versa.
The evaluation concludes with an opinion that indicates whether a manuscript is: Accepted, Accepted with minor modifications, Accepted with major modifications, or Rejected. In case of discrepancies between the opinions of the evaluators, the manuscript is sent to a third evaluator and with this third opinion, the editorial committee makes the decision to reject or send the article for modification. This decision will be informed through a letter sent through the platform to the authors' e-mail.
If the paper was positively evaluated, either with minor or major modifications, the authors have a period of two weeks to send a new version, including the modifications indicated by the evaluators.
The reviewers are academic experts in the subject, external to the Editorial Committee and preferably from countries of a different geographic location than the authors of the article.