Peer Review Policy

The academic peer review of manuscripts submitted for publication in scientific journals of different kinds has been a fundamental procedure to assess the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support the research groups.

The articles received in EPISTEMUS follow a standard procedure offered by OJS and adapted to streamline the editorial process with a high level of quality.

Before going through with external reviewers, they may be rejected by the Editor-in-Chief before being submitted to evaluation if the format does not conform to what is indicated in the rules for authors or if the subject is outside the editorial line of the journal. This will occur within a maximum of 1 week after it is received.

Authors may submit their article as a new manuscript once all the observations made have been corrected.

Peer evaluation procedure

The Section Editor invites you to review the work with qualified expert reviewers from the database or new to the article.

  1. The reviewer is invited with the summary of the work.
  2. The reviewer accepts or rejects the job.
  3. An opinion is issued with recommendations to the author and the editor.
  4. They are sent to the author and the author performs and responds.
  5. They are sent to the reviewer and this passes judgment again.
  6. Once accepted it goes to the next editorial phase.

Times

  1. 1-week period to accept revision.
  2. There is a reminder period in case you did not respond (1 week)
  3. You have a 3-week period to perform the review.
  4. And a period of 1 week for exchange of revisions / corrections per event.

Opinion

  1. The task of the Revisor is to review the content of the work to give an opinion on it, which can be:
    1. Accepted: Everything was considered correct.
    2. Conditioned: Requires editorial adjustments, information, clarification, references.
    3. Rejected: Does not meet the objective of the article, lacks knowledge, information, mastery of the subject, references and is justified.