Peer Review Process

 

Once the article has been received, the reception is confirmed immediately, and an ID number for the follow-up of the process by the authors is assigned. The internal review process begins (pre-review), and the author is informed about the acceptance or rejection to continue in the arbitration process within a maximum period of two weeks.

Subsequently, two academic peers - national and international - external to the publishing institution are assigned as evaluators of the article under the double blind modality. In case of disagreement in the concepts, a third evaluating peer is appointed to resolve the disagreements. They are the ones who make observations and issue a concept in terms of: (a) Accepted for publication, (b) Pending publication or (c) Not accepted for publication. Likewise, the journal verifies the correspondence between citations and references, and compliance with the required standard, as well as the control and verification of plagiarism through the iThenticate software.

In the arbitration process, the following criteria are taken into account:

  1. Compliance with the rules and standards of the Publications Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA).
  2. Relevance of the topic to the coverage area of what is published in the journal.
  3. Contribution with new theoretical and practical knowledge on the subject matter.
  4. Rigor and coherence between the methodological formulation and the type of statistical analysis used (when applicable).
  5. Rigor and objectivity with the topic addressed.
  6. Appropriate, clear and coherent use of the written language.
  7. Updating and validity of the informed bibliographic support (last five years)
  8. Inclusion of references of articles in English

The format used by the reviewers to evaluate the articles includes the following items:

Title: Pertinence, relation to the subject and extension

Resumen: Structure and length.

Keywords

Abstract: Structure and length

Palabras clave

Conceptual framework: Pertinence, relevance, updating and bibliographic support

Objectives: Clarity and relevance

Methodological aspects: type of study, participants, instruments, procedure, data analysis and ethical aspects.

Type of study

Participants

Instrument

Procedure

Scientific quality: It refers to the type of article.

Contribution and impact of the article or study

Results: Adequacy and relevance of the reported data

References: Updating, relevance, quantity, compliance with the standard and consistency with citations.

General remarks:

Concept: Accepted for publication, Pending publication, or Not accepted for publication

Conflict of interests

This process is carried out within a maximum period of four (4) months (except if reviewers are not found, or in case of lack of consensus in the peers? concepts). Once the document has been arbitrated, the concept of publication is announced to the contact author through an email (s). In case of requesting adjustments to the article, the author / s / have a maximum period of 20 days to make these adjustments, and they must send a new version of the document and an anonymous letter in which they respond to each of the suggestions / remarks made by the evaluators. The editor decides whether the modified article is sent again to the same peer evaluators assigned in order to request their final concept. Having received the comments and concepts of the second round of review, and if there is agreement on the recommendations, the editor, with the coordination and support of the Editorial Committee, or whoever this designates, makes the final decision of publication or rejection.

When the concept corresponds to Pending publication, the suggestions are forwarded to the authors for them to carry them out and return them along with: (a) a letter informing that the suggestions were accepted and included in the document; and (b) a new version of the article in which the suggestions included are indicated. It is the responsibility of the authors to comply with all the suggestions and recommendations made; in case of disagreements with these, they should provide information and arguments to support their views. Once this has been accomplished, the article is sent again to the evaluators for their respective verification and publication concept.

If the article is Accepted for publication, the authors must comply with the delivery of: (a) a letter notifying that the suggestions made by the evaluators were included, if they exist; (b) the final versions of the article in Spanish and English (and Portuguese, if this is the original language); (c) the authorization format established by the journal for the reproduction of the text with signatures of the authors; and (d) the identification data of the authors for the respective database of the journal (ORCID code, full names, contact information, academic background, H index, among others).

In any case, the editor and the editorial committee reserve the right to accept or reject the articles. The acceptance of the article for its publication implies the cession of reproduction and dissemination rights by any means to the Universidad Católica de Colombia in its capacity as publisher entity of the journal.

Once the articles have been accepted, the final editing and layout process begins, which is carried out by the publisher of the Universidad Católica de Colombia, through the following process: (a) submission of the accepted material for publication by the editor, ( b) style editing in Spanish and / or English language when required, (c) sending of the corrected material to the editor to be remitted it to the authors, (d) forwarding of the verified material from the authors to the editor including their suggestions, so that it can be sent back to the publisher, (e) text design and layout of the material -which is also sent to the authors through the editor-, and (f) publication of the material on the website.

Sistema OJS 3 - Metabiblioteca |