Blind peer review process

The PROciencias Scientific Journal accepts articles that are theoretical or empirical works in the field of education. Accepted types of works include scientific research articles and literature reviews. All articles undergo a rigorous process that includes the following phases:

Manuscript submission.
Initial review.
Blind peer review.
Second draft of the manuscript.
Second round of review.
Final decision.

Publication.

Manuscript submission: Once the manuscript is received by the Journal, the author(s) will receive an email through the journal's platform informing them that the review process will begin.

Initial review: The editorial team conducts an initial review of the manuscript, ensuring its thematic relevance and compliance with the journal's established formal criteria. If the editorial team determines that the manuscript meets the minimum criteria to continue its review, the author(s) are asked to send a letter of originality and copyright transfer to the Journal, declaring that the article has not been published or simultaneously submitted to another journal. Two blind peer reviewers are then assigned to begin the evaluation process. If the article does not meet the criteria for thematic relevance, novelty, and editorial guidelines, the article is rejected.

Blind external peer review: When the editorial team decides that the article can be sent for external review, two blind reviewers are assigned, who, through the journal's platform, complete the respective evaluation form, whether for a theoretical or research article.

The evaluation concludes with a decision indicating whether a manuscript is: Accepted, Accepted with minor revisions, Accepted with major revisions, or Rejected. The evaluation form asks the reviewers to: a) indicate whether or not the form and content criteria are met; b) Conduct a general evaluation of the article, including suggestions and/or contributions.

In case of discrepancies between the reviewers' opinions, the manuscript is sent to a third reviewer. Based on this third reviewer's opinion, the editorial committee decides whether to reject the article or send it for revision.

The reviewers are academic experts in the field, external to the editorial committee, and preferably from countries geographically different from that of the article's authors.

Second version of the manuscript: Based on the observations and contributions of the peer reviewers, the editor prepares a document that incorporates the suggestions and removes any information that could identify them. This document is sent to the authors, who then decide whether to submit a revised version of their manuscript, taking into account the reviewers' comments, or to withdraw from the process. Should the authors decide to submit a revised version to continue the evaluation process, the editorial team assigns a submission date based on the extent of the observations and modifications the author(s) need to make (this date typically ranges from 2 to 3 weeks). If the authors decide not to continue the process, the manuscript is removed from the journal's database, and the reviewers are informed that no further versions will be accepted for evaluation.

If the article is rejected by the reviewers, the author(s) are notified by letter, which includes the reviewers' suggestions.

Second round of review: The editor receives a revised version of the article and sends it anonymously to the reviewers of the first version to verify whether the author(s) have considered their suggested adjustments. To this end, the first version, its initial evaluation, and the revised version of the article are submitted. Based on this, each reviewer assesses the revised manuscript and informs the editor whether further modifications are necessary or if they believe the article is ready for publication.

Final Decision: Once the editor receives the updated peer reviews, the editorial team and the editor analyze the overall evaluation of the manuscript and proceed to approve or reject it for publication.

If the reviewers believe that further adjustments to the manuscript are still needed, the editor prepares a new document with the evaluations, ensuring the anonymity of the experts. This document is sent to the authors, and the process is repeated until the reviewers deem the manuscript suitable for publication. The anonymity of both the authors and the reviewers is maintained at all stages. This is how the final version is prepared.

Publication: Once the article is finally accepted, the authors receive an acceptance letter with the publication date.

*The time that elapses between the receipt of the article and the first response from the referees is one (1) month to two (2) months; and the time between receipt and the estimated time for its publication is three (3) months to six (6) months.