Guidelines for Reviewers

Manuscripts submitted to Humanities, Technology and Education (HUTECEDU) are evaluated by at least two external and independent reviewers under a double-blind peer review system, ensuring the anonymity of both authors and reviewers. Reviewers’ comments constitute an essential tool for supporting editorial decisions regarding the acceptance, revision, or rejection of manuscripts.

Reviewer Selection

When selecting reviewers, the editorial team considers the following criteria:

  • Appropriate academic qualifications, preferably holding a doctoral degree.
  • Demonstrated expertise in the subject area of the manuscript.
  • Ability to evaluate manuscripts using scientific and academic criteria.
  • Absence of conflicts of interest with the authors or affiliated institutions.

Reviewer Responsibilities

By accepting a review invitation, reviewers assume the following responsibilities:

  • Declare any potential conflict of interest before starting the evaluation.
  • Decline the invitation promptly if unavailable and, whenever possible, suggest alternative reviewers.
  • Complete and submit the review report within the established deadline.
  • Provide an objective, impartial, and evidence-based assessment with specific and constructive comments.
  • Inform the editorial team of any suspected misconduct or unethical practice identified in the manuscript.
  • Maintain strict confidentiality regarding the manuscript content during and after the review process.

HUTECEDU follows the principles established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), promoting ethical, transparent, and responsible scholarly publishing. Reviewers are encouraged to consult the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers before conducting any evaluation.

Timeliness of Response

Timely communication between the journal and reviewers is essential to ensure efficient, fair, and transparent editorial processes. Reviewers are expected to:

  • Accept or decline the invitation within a reasonable period after reviewing the manuscript title and abstract.
  • Submit their evaluation within the agreed deadline.
  • Notify the journal immediately if they require an extension of the review period.
  • Suggest potential alternative reviewers if they are unable to undertake the evaluation.

Potential Conflicts of Interest

Before accepting a review assignment, reviewers must disclose any circumstances that may affect their objectivity and academic independence.

Conflicts of interest may be:

  • Personal or professional.
  • Financial or institutional.
  • Intellectual, ideological, or religious.

If there is any uncertainty regarding a potential conflict of interest, reviewers should consult the editorial team before accepting the assignment.

Confidentiality

All manuscripts received for evaluation must be treated as strictly confidential documents.

  • The content may not be used, disclosed, or distributed before official publication.
  • Reviewers must avoid revealing their identity to the authors.
  • Review reports must be prepared personally by the assigned reviewer.
  • If assistance from another expert is required, prior authorization must be obtained from the Editorial Committee.
  • Any additional contribution must be acknowledged within the review report.

Reporting Potential Ethical Irregularities

Reviewers must notify the editorial office of any suspicion related to:

  • Plagiarism or self-plagiarism.
  • Redundant or duplicate publication.
  • Data or results manipulation.
  • Failure to comply with ethical principles in research involving humans or animals.
  • Any other conduct that may compromise the scientific integrity of the manuscript.

Such situations will be formally examined by the Editorial Committee in accordance with the journal’s ethical policies.

Evaluation Criteria for Reviewers

To ensure a rigorous, objective, and transparent review process, reviewers should assess the following aspects:

  • Originality and Authenticity: The manuscript should contribute new knowledge and present original results without evidence of plagiarism or data manipulation.
  • Importance and Relevance: The work should contribute to the advancement of knowledge in the fields of Humanities, Technology, and Education and be relevant to the academic community.
  • Scientific and Methodological Rigor: The research should be well-grounded, employ an appropriate methodology, and present conclusions supported by the evidence obtained.
  • Research Ethics: The study should comply with applicable ethical principles, particularly when involving human participants, animals, or sensitive information.
  • Quality of Writing: The manuscript should demonstrate conceptual clarity, argumentative coherence, and grammatical accuracy to facilitate effective scholarly communication.

Important: Reviewers are encouraged to provide constructive comments and recommendations that contribute to strengthening the manuscripts under evaluation. Final editorial decisions are based on a comprehensive analysis of all review reports received, ensuring a fair, transparent, and rigorous editorial process.