Process of Peer Evaluation

Process of Peer Evaluation

1st The article submitted to the Journal are assigned by the Editor-in-chief (or by the Associate editor) to an Executive editor, who becomes responsible for the progress of the article and should verify the text in relation to the mission, the vision and the standards of the Journal.

2nd In this step, the article could be rejected or redirected to the authors for revision and later submission.

3rd Articles that comply with the journal's guidelines, mission, and vision will be forwarded to at least two external reviewers. The Executive Editor may consult with members of the Editorial Board to serve as reviewers or to recommend potential reviewers for the article.

4th The Journal adopts a double-blind peer review system for evaluating submissions. The names and institutions of both authors and reviewers are kept confidential throughout the entire process. It is the author's responsibility to remove any identifying information from the submitted manuscript, and the article may be rejected if identification is possible.

5th Articles will be evaluated by the referees in a proper formulary, which will be made available by the Electronic Journal Publishing System (EJPS) and defined together by the Editor-in-chief and the rest of the Editorial board.

6th At the time of the final review, the reviewer may include additional information related to the evaluation, as well as suggestions they consider relevant for the improvement of the publication. The author may choose to accept these suggestions or justify not including them. This will be assessed by the Editor-in-Chief or a member of the Editorial Board designated by the Editor-in-Chief.

7th Manuscripts will be considered for publication after approval by the language style review. Once accepted, they will be published.

8th Occasionally, articles by authors invited by the Editorial Board may be published, after consultation with the Editor-in-Chief. These articles will also undergo peer review.