Evaluation of Manuscripts

Peer Review

Authors must carefully review the article submission guidelines before proceeding with their submissions. Once the article is submitted, the Editorial Assistant conducts an initial screening and then verifies the document’s originality using the iThenticate system. Based on the results, the article is either forwarded to the Editor-in-Chief or rejected due to originality issues.

The Editor-in-Chief reviews the article or, if applicable, assigns it to a member of the Editorial Committee for a preliminary evaluation. The assigned Editorial Committee member informs the Editor-in-Chief whether the article should be rejected due to formatting issues or lack of alignment with the journal’s scope, or if it can proceed to peer review. The Editor-in-Chief then proposes external reviewers.

The Editorial Assistant invites two external peer reviewers to conduct a detailed evaluation of the manuscript. If any of the invited reviewers decline, the Editorial Assistant will continue sending invitations until the double-blind review process is secured. Reviewers are unaware of the authors’ identities, and authors do not know the reviewers’ identities. Reviewers are given 30 calendar days to complete their evaluation.

The reviewers submit their assessments and comments to the Editorial Assistant using the format provided by Revista 360. The Editorial Assistant then reviews and summarizes these evaluations to inform the Editor-in-Chief of the outcome.

The Editor-in-Chief reviews the result and decides whether to reject the article, invite a third reviewer (who also has 30 calendar days to complete the review), or accept the article with a request for revisions. Authors who receive revision requests must thoroughly address the comments made by the Editor-in-Chief and the reviewers. They have 15 calendar days to submit the revised version.

Finally, the authors submit the final version of their article, having reviewed and incorporated the suggestions and recommendations provided. The Editorial Assistant then sends the revision report and the new version of the article to the Editor-in-Chief, who decides whether the same or a different Editorial Committee member will verify that the observations and suggestions have been appropriately addressed. If so, the Committee member informs the Editor-in-Chief that the article is ready for publication. Otherwise, they inform the Editorial Assistant that further revisions are required before concluding the process.

Once the final version of the article, including all required revisions, reaches the Editor-in-Chief, they authorize its publication and notify the Editorial Assistant to begin the copyediting, layout, and publishing process.