Peer review

To conduct the peer review process, the journal Editorial Committee, after having reviewed that the manuscript fulfills the style and content rules indicated to authors, will forward the manuscript to two leading experts in the field outside the Editorial Committee, following the double blind method.

The assessment of both referees will judge the significance of the manuscript, its contribution to knowledge in the field of study, the originality of the work, the validity of the discourse and the critical judgment, the use of bibliography and the referencing technique, etc., making recommendations of improvement, if necessary.

Based on the referees’ recommendations, the editor-in-chief will send a reasoned evaluation decision to the the corresponding author through the OJS platform, in approximately a month and a half. The evaluation will include the recommendation result (publication as is / minor revision / major revision / reject), as well as the observations and comments made by the referees.

If the manuscript was accepted for publication subject to the authors making some changes, the authors must send a new version of the manuscript to the Editorial Committee, following the requirements and suggestions by the referees. They must also send a letter indicating the changes made to the manuscript. The approximate period for authors to make the requested changes is one month. The Editorial Committee will verify the validity of the modifications made by the authors.

Depending on the degree of fulfillment of the requested changes, the Editorial Committee will take a decision regarding the publication or not of the paper. The decision will be communicated to the corresponding author by the editor-in-chief.

Print edition ISSN: 2341-0531 / Digital edition ISSN: 2387-0346. Copyright © 2016 ZARCH. All Rights Reserved