Evaluation

Evaluation Policy

The processing of articles in Culturas Científicas follows the next workflow:

  • First phase: editorial review

Every manuscript received by Revista Culturas Científicas is first reviewed by the editors. This first review is not about its specific content. It seeks to verify the following three aspects.   

  1. That the contribution meets our Aims & Scope

  2. That the contribution follows, at least minimally, the formalities set forth in the Guidelines for Authors.

  3. That the contribution does not commit plagiarism or self-plagiarism. We remind you that all manuscripts received will be processed by the TURNITIN Originality plagiarism detection software, as stated in our policy in this regard.

If the manuscript fails in any of these aspects, and depending on the depth of the errors, the editors will recommend to the director the Rejection ad portas or condition the continuity of the evaluation to make corrections of form and/or style. On the other hand, and if the article does not fail in these aspects, the editors will recommend continuing the evaluation. It is the director, in conversation with the editors, who will make the final decision of this phase. 

  • Second phase: double-blind peer review

Manuscripts that pass the first phase will be reviewed, following the double-blind method, by two specialists from the area that are external to the editorial committee. The reviewers of Culturas Científicas are chosen for the relevance of their academic expertise in relation to the subject of the manuscript and we try not to over-demand them in order to obtain impartial reports.

Reviewers will evaluate each manuscript paying attention to its relevance to our Focus and Scope; its originality and/or relevance in relation to its field of study; its explanatory clarity; how up-to-date its references are; and whether it makes correct use of references., it is the Editorial Committee of the journal that will deliberate the final decision considering what the reviewers expose. For this very reason, even a third reviewer could be called if necessary.

We note that Culturas Científicas is a journal committed to the growth of knowledge. For this reason, and except for some specific cases of Rejection ad-portas, we always deliver reports that explain the rejection of manuscripts  

The final decision of the Editorial Committee, based on the reports of specialists, will fall into one of the following categories:

a) Accepted for publication

b) Accepted with observations

c) Currently not admissible

d) Rejected for publication

In case (a), the manuscript is accepted without conditions. In case (b), we will send the correction proposals made by their reviewers, which may be major or minor, to the authors and they will be given a period of up to 20 days to return the amended manuscript. Once returned, it will be evaluated to determine if these corrections were applied satisfactorily and if the article can be published. If the author does not meet the deadline or does not apply the corrections sufficiently, the publication or rejection of the article will be subject to deliberation by the Editorial Committee.  

Case (c) refers to articles whose academic value is recognized by the reviewers, but which were rejected due to the large number of corrections they need. In other words, they are valuable, but require considerable time of work to reach their full potential. In these cases, the manuscript will be rejected and, together with the reports of its reviewers, the authors will be notified of the situation and will be left in freedom of action. Nor is it guaranteed that, once corrected, the article will be immediately accepted if it is submitted again, since it must go through evaluation again. In these cases, the only thing the journal advocates is the untapped potential of the work. We remind you that even in case (d) Culturas Científicas delivers the corresponding reports and/or reasons.         

To conclude, we warn that the manuscripts approved for publication that have been modified during this second phase will be processed again by the TURNITIN Originality plagiarism detection software prior to publication. On the other hand, and although it has become clear that it is the Editorial Committee that makes the decisions of all phases, Culturas Científicas highly esteems the work carried out by its reviewers. In most cases, just one unfavorable report is enough for our journal to desist from publishing a manuscript.