Peer review process

RECIAL is governed by the "Double-blind external peer review" system. Each published article is previously submitted to a double-blind peer review, carried out by academics specially convened for each work, who have a period of 45 days to carry out their evaluation. This double-blind review system allows the anonymity of both authors and reviewers to be maintained.

Authors must adhere to the Journal's formal rules (APA Standards) for the presentation of manuscripts and are responsible for the content of their articles.

In the event of different variants in the evaluation process, the following procedure will be followed: If an article is rejected by one of the reviewers and accepted by another, a third reviewer is called upon to decide whether or not to publish it. If it is rejected by two reviewers in the first instance, the article is discarded from publication. When advised by the reviewers, the manuscript is returned to the author for suggested modifications to be made within 30 days; in this case the manuscript is then sent back to the reviewer to agree to the changes or not. Authors are notified of the acceptance or rejection of the manuscript.

The Editorial Board, based on the decisions of the Reviewers Committee, decides on the final publication of the articles within 4-6 months of their submission. The decisions of the Editorial Board and the results of the refereeing process are final.

The final stage before publication consists of formal corrections and adjustments made by the members of the Editorial Board.

All articles published in the different sections of the journal are always subject to double blind refereeing.

Please find attached the refereeing sheet that guides the evaluation of the reviewers: PDF.