Reviewer guidelines

Manuscripts submitted to the journal Investigación & Praxis en Ciencias Sociales are evaluated by at least two independent reviewers under a double-blind peer review model. Their comments are essential to ensuring scientific quality and supporting editorial decisions.

Reviewer Selection

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

  • Appropriate academic qualifications, preferably a doctoral degree.
  • Demonstrated expertise in the subject area of the manuscript.
  • The ability to conduct evaluations based on scientific and academic judgment.
  • No conflicts of interest with the authors or the institutions involved.

Reviewer Responsibilities

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

  • Declare any potential conflicts of interest before beginning the evaluation.
  • Decline the invitation promptly if they are 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, including specific and constructive comments.
  • Inform the editorial team of any suspected misconduct or ethical violations identified in the manuscript.
  • Maintain strict confidentiality regarding the contents of the manuscript during and after the review process.

To ensure an efficient editorial process, reviewers are asked to read the following guidelines carefully.

The Journal strictly adheres to the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Reviewers are encouraged to consult the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.

Timeliness of Responses

Timely communication between the Journal and reviewers is essential to ensuring 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 established deadline.
  • Notify the editorial team immediately if an extension of the assigned deadline is needed.
  • Suggest potential alternative reviewers when they are unable to undertake the evaluation.

Potential Conflicts of Interest

Before accepting a review assignment, reviewers must disclose any circumstances that could 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, the reviewer must consult the editorial team before accepting the review assignment.

Confidentiality

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

  • Reviewers must not use, disclose, or distribute manuscript content before its official publication.
  • Reviewers must avoid revealing their identities 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 in the review report.

Reporting Potential Ethical Misconduct

Reviewers must inform the editorial office of any suspicion involving:

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

These matters 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 must assess the following aspects:

  • Originality and Authenticity: The manuscript must contribute new knowledge and present original findings, without evidence of plagiarism or data manipulation.
  • Importance and Relevance: The work must contribute to the advancement of knowledge in the social sciences, humanities, and cultural studies, and be relevant to the academic community.
  • Scientific and Methodological Rigor: The research must be well grounded in relevant scholarship, employ an appropriate methodology, and present conclusions supported by the evidence obtained.
  • Research Ethics: The study must comply with applicable ethical principles, particularly when it involves human participants, animals, or sensitive information.
  • Writing Quality: The manuscript must demonstrate conceptual clarity, logical coherence, and grammatical accuracy to facilitate effective scientific communication.

Reviewers are encouraged to provide constructive comments that help improve the quality of the manuscript.