Guía para la evaluación por pares

The main aim of this guide is to ensure that the peer review process carried out at REIDICS is characterised by the following:

  • Ensuring an independent review and providing constructive feedback to authors in a respectful manner.
  • Ensuring that manuscripts offer a comprehensive, objective, and balanced overview of their respective topics.
  • Ensuring that the information provided is up-to-date, scientifically accurate, and verifiable.
  • Ensuring that the conclusions or arguments derived from the research are intelligible and relevant to the discipline.

Confidentiality and Ethical Conduct Instructions

Confidentiality

All manuscripts are confidential information, and reviewers are requested to refrain from sharing or discussing them with third parties unless it is to seek advice on a specific aspect, in which case confidentiality must also be maintained.

Ethical Conduct

REIDICS expects the following from reviewers involved in its editorial process:

  • If a reviewer believes that another person would be better qualified to assess the material, they should notify the editorial team.
  • If a reviewer feels they will struggle to provide an objective evaluation of the material, they should inform the editorial team immediately.
  • If there is a current or past relationship between the reviewer and any institutions or individuals related to the manuscript that may cause a conflict of interest, this should be indicated in the Review Form, and the reviewer should decline the evaluation.

Review Deadlines

Once a reviewer has accepted the commitment to evaluate a manuscript, they must submit their report within 20 days.

Review Report Structure and Style

Reviewers will submit their reports by completing the Evaluation Form and must adhere to the following guidelines:

  • The peer review process has a dual purpose: to advise the Editorial Team on whether the manuscript should be published and to communicate any improvements that can be made to the work.
  • Reviewers must be aware that their role is to advise REIDICS as specialists on the work that a colleague has done, not to judge or decide. Therefore, the tone used in the reports must always be one of utmost respect towards individuals and institutions.
  • All criticisms and comments must be objective, and not mere differences of opinion or unsubstantiated personal evaluations.
  • Criticism should always be directed at the argumentation and the consistency of the data presented, never at the authors.

Information on Aspects to be Evaluated

General and specific aspects of the manuscript will be evaluated to determine whether the research described:

  • Advances knowledge and is relevant to the discipline.
  • Meets the level of argumentation, content structure, and writing required for scientific communications.
  • Is of interest to the target audience of the journal.

General Aspects Evaluation

  • The degree of originality of the work.
  • Its significance for the advancement of the discipline, and, if applicable, other social, cultural, or economic implications.

Evaluation of Specific Elements

The evaluation of specific aspects will be grouped into the following blocks:

Writing

The clarity and precision with which the manuscript has been written will be evaluated, both in the body of the text and in the titles, abstracts, and keywords, which should unequivocally reflect the main topic of the research.

Length and Structure

The text will be assessed for its logical structure in conveying information efficiently, and whether any sections need to be expanded, reduced, or omitted.

Methodology and Clarity

This block assesses whether the chosen methods and analytical criteria are appropriate, and whether the research process is clearly described, allowing the work to be replicated by another qualified researcher.

Results and Conclusions

The clarity with which the most important arguments and results are identified in the manuscript will be evaluated, as well as whether the conclusions are derived from the analysis of these results.

Citations and References

This section assesses whether all citations and references used in the text are relevant and up-to-date, and whether they adhere to the latest edition of APA guidelines.

Similarities

The reviewer will indicate whether they are aware of any other works, published or forthcoming, that are identical or very similar to the manuscript being evaluated.