Peer review policy

The manuscripts presented in the different calls are submitted to a first review by the Editor or the Editorial Committee who carry out the initial assessment. They consider whether the article is original and unpublished.  Besides, they check if the manuscript complies with the Publication Regulations for the authors of the journal. If needed, the necessary adjustments are recommended to the authors; on the contrary, it can be definitively rejected.

The manuscripts that pass the initial evaluation of the Editorial Committee are sent to an arbitration process carried out by national and international peer experts. In each issue, the maximum number of internal peer reviewers from the Universidad Tecnológica de Pereira in no case will exceed 20%. The entire process is documented in the formats set by the journal, filed in its repository and partially shared in the Colciencias Bibliographic Database (Publindex Colombia).

Once your paper has been assessed for suitability by the editor, it will then be double blind peer reviewed by independent, anonymous expert referees. The double-blind review methodology is used to maintain confidentiality, avoiding the identity among the authors and the reviewers. For this purpose, the following steps are taken into account:

  1. The authors of the document should delete their names from the text and other related information, this should go in the author formats.

  2. The information uploaded (metadata) to the page, is not shared with the evaluators that participate in the editorial process to keep hidden the identity of the authors and reviewers among themselves.

  3. The management of the files and their information is used only by the editorial process staff, who warrant the privacy of the information and mobility in the review process.

  4. Each reviewer will have 8 working days to give acceptance of the work entrusted to the reviewer (accepted review or rejected review).

  5. The reviewers, once the arbitration work has been accepted, has a maximum of four weeks to carry out the review and transfer the results into the evaluation format established with the pertinent observations.

  6. If the opinion of both referees and that of the editor agrees to reject an article, it will be returned to the authors with the respective observations to show the objectives not reached in the manuscript.

  7. In case of presenting what is stated in the previous paragraph, the author may appeal to the Editorial Committee, in order to have his case reviewed. If there is a contradiction between the evaluations of the two arbitrators, the intervention of a third party will be resorted under the same conditions as the other arbitrators.

  8. If the article is finally accepted, it will be returned to the author, with the proper observations if needed. The paper must be resent with the corrections in a period of no more than 10 calendar days, and uploaded the manuscript again through the Open Journal System (OJS). If the manuscript is not returned within the established term, its publication will be deferred to a new issue.

  9. The manuscript will be withdrawn from the editorial process after 60 calendar days of no answer from the request for any adjustment. In that case, you must start all the process without the obligation of notification by the journal.

 

Editorial process of the journal

The editorial process refers to the terms to which the article will be submitted in order to be published in our journal. These are:

  1. Send the manuscript by the main author through the web portal of the journal via OJS. In some exceptional cases, approved by the editor, they will be accepted by electronic mail fulfilling all the requirements of the web platform.

  2. Reception of the manuscript by the editorial assistant, who verifies agreement with the aspects of form, in what refers to the format and attached files required.

  3. Once the basic reception criteria are fulfilled, the manuscript goes to the editor.

  4. Assignment of section editors corresponding to the subject of the manuscript.

  5. Sending by the editor to section reviewers to review basic compliance of form and relevance.

  6. Submission of the article by section editors to the editor.

  7. Submission of the article, by the editor, to the peer reviewing experts (arbitrators) selected from the database.

  8. Receiving the opinion of the expert referees, final decision that can be any of the following:

          Accepted, sending without modifications (Accept sending).

          Accepted with style or redaction corrections (revisions are needed).

          Accepted with major corrections (Resend for review).

          Rejection (Reject the paper).

  1. Editorial decision (this will depend on the result delivered by the peer reviewers).
  2. Publication of the paper.