Peer review system
Scientific or Academic Publications
Stage 1. Manuscript Submission
Submission can be made through the OJS system or by email. Receipt of the manuscript does not necessarily imply acceptance for publication.
OJS
In OJS, the author must create a user account to upload the documents. If you experience any difficulty at this stage, please contact the following emails: SUPPORT CONTACT EMAIL (“AIHERNANDEZG@UTN.AC.CR”) or ajporras@utn.ac.cr
The author sends the following information to ajporras@utn.ac.cr, aihernandezg@utn.ac.cr, or revistaarje@utn.ac.cr:
-
The manuscript formatted according to the journal’s requirements, full name, ORCID, affiliation (including city and country), and institutional email address.
-
The authorization letter for publication of the manuscript, signed by all authors.
-
If required, images or figures in PNG format or in an editable version with good resolution, along with descriptive text for accessibility purposes.
In cases where documents have multiple authors, the person who sends the email will be identified by the journal as the primary contact.
Stage 2. Editorial Review
The director and the editor carry out a plagiarism review using the Turnitin tool. If an exact transcription of a significant percentage of text is found without proper citation or referencing, the manuscript will be rejected outright.
Subsequently, the editor confirms that all required documentation has been included and analyzes, together with the director, the relevance of the article within the journal’s thematic areas.
The director or editor will respond within a maximum of two weeks, indicating to the primary contact whether changes are required or if the article proceeds to the next stage.
In case of non-compliance with requirements, a sub-stage will begin in which the manuscript is returned to the primary contact with observations for improvement.
The author will have a maximum of ten business days to address the observations. After this period, if there is no response, the manuscript will be removed from the editorial workflow.
Stage 3. Single-Blind Peer Review Model
After incorporating the observations from Stage 2, the manuscript will be submitted to the Editorial Committee, which will select two reviewers (external to the Editorial Committee, the publishing entity, and independent of the author’s institution). These reviewers will receive a form with instructions to carry out the review. The Editorial Committee has a maximum of one month for this process.
The journal follows a single-blind model, where reviewers know the identity of the authors, but the authors do not know the identity of the reviewers.
Reviewers must have sufficient time to issue their evaluation and are given up to one month to thoroughly review the document. After the process, they will provide their assessment and classify the manuscript into one of the following three options:
-
The manuscript is publishable, as it meets all requirements.
-
The document may be published once the suggested corrections are made.
-
The document is not publishable, as it lacks many of the required evaluative elements.
Reviewers also submit the evaluation form and the manuscript with tracked changes (if required) to the editor.
In cases where one reviewer recommends rejection and another recommends publication with revisions, the document will be sent to a third reviewer to resolve the discrepancy, who will have a maximum of one month to provide their assessment.
Stage 4. Submission of Review Feedback to Authors
The editor will review the evaluation form and manuscripts with observations (depending on the decision) and will send an anonymized document with corrections to the corresponding author for incorporation into the manuscript. This stage takes a maximum of two weeks.
Stage 5. Receipt of the Revised Manuscript
The corresponding author must return the manuscript with the corrections within a period not exceeding one month. If there are objections to the review, a letter with well-founded arguments must be submitted for consideration by the Editorial Committee.
Once the corrected manuscript is received, it will be reviewed again by the director and editor to verify that the observations have been addressed or justified, within a period of one week.
Stage 6. Evaluation and Decision by the Editorial Committee
The manuscripts will be evaluated for a decision by the Editorial Committee. At this stage, the Committee rejects or accepts the manuscript for publication based on the reviewers’ assessments.
Additionally, if the primary contact has submitted a reasoned explanation regarding the evaluation, it will be considered at this stage and a response will be provided.
This stage may take between 15 days and one month, depending on whether there is an appeal by the primary contact.
Stage 7. Philological Review and Accessible Layout
At this stage, philological review, reference checking, and document formatting are carried out by the journal’s assigned staff. Additionally, all proofs are adapted to ensure accessibility according to international standards. This stage may take approximately one month.
Stage 8. Manuscript Publication
The Editorial Board reviews the final version of the manuscript, and the editor publishes the article on the journal’s official website. This stage requires a period of 15 days.
Overall, from submission to publication, the process usually takes a minimum of 12 weeks and a maximum of 35 weeks, depending on the response time of external participants in the editorial workflow and the number of changes required in the manuscript.
