Peer Review Process

The evaluation and processing workflow for articles submitted to Culturas Científicas is as follows:

First Phase: Editorial Review

Every manuscript submitted to Culturas Científicas undergoes an initial review by the editors. This review does not focus on specific content but verifies the following aspects:

  1. The manuscript aligns with the journal's Scope and Focus.
  2. The manuscript meets at least the minimum formal requirements outlined in the Guidelines for Authors.
  3. The manuscript does not involve plagiarism or self-plagiarism. Note that all manuscripts are screened using the TURNITIN Originality detection software, as stated in our plagiarism policy.

If the manuscript fails to meet any of these criteria, the editors may recommend to the acting editor-in-chief either an immediate rejection or conditional continuation of the review process, contingent on addressing style and/or formatting issues. On the other hand, if the manuscript passes these checks, the editors will recommend proceeding with the review process. The final decision in this phase lies with the editor-in-chief, in consultation with the editors.

Second Phase: Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass the first phase are reviewed under a double-blind system by two external subject matter experts. Reviewers are selected based on their academic expertise in the manuscript's topic, and efforts are made to avoid overburdening them to ensure impartial reports.

Reviewers assess each manuscript on the following criteria:

  • Relevance to the journal’s Scope and Focus
  • Originality and/or significance in the field
  • Clarity of explanation
  • Currency of references
  • Appropriate use of citations

Based on the reviewers' feedback, the journal’s Editorial Board makes the final decision. In some cases, a third reviewer may be consulted.

Culturas Científicas is committed to advancing knowledge, and except in cases of immediate rejection, authors are always provided with detailed reports explaining the reasons for manuscript rejection.

The Editorial Board’s final decision, informed by the reviewers’ reports, falls into one of the following categories:

a) Accepted for publication
b) Accepted with revisions
c) Currently inadmissible
d) Rejected for publication

  • (a) The manuscript is accepted without conditions.
  • (b) Authors are provided with reviewer-suggested corrections, which may be major or minor. They are given up to 20 days to submit the revised manuscript. Once resubmitted, the revised manuscript is reviewed to ensure corrections were applied and that it is ready for publication. Failure to meet the deadline or adequately apply corrections may lead to further deliberation by the Editorial Board.
  • (c) Refers to manuscripts acknowledged as academically valuable but rejected due to the significant revisions required. These manuscripts are recognized for their potential but need substantial work to reach their full value. Authors are informed of the situation and given complete freedom to take further action. However, resubmission is not guaranteed immediate acceptance, as it will undergo another review process.
  • (d) Even in cases of outright rejection, Culturas Científicas provides authors with detailed feedback and justifications.

Finally, all manuscripts approved for publication that underwent modifications during the second phase are re-screened using TURNITIN Originality before publication. While it is clear that the Editorial Board holds decision-making authority at every phase, Culturas Científicas highly values the work of its reviewers. In most cases, a single unfavorable report is sufficient for the journal to decline publication of a manuscript.