Peer review process

The works received receive a preliminary evaluation by the Editorial Team, in order to guarantee three aspects:

  1. Relevance of the topic with respect to the scope declared by the RIIYM.
  2. Compliance with the minimum presentation format requirements.
  3. Originality and unpublished character at the time of evaluation.

If a positive result is obtained, the works will be subjected to a peer evaluation process managed by the Executive Editor and with the following characteristics:

  1. The review itself is carried out by an Academic Committee made up of external and internal evaluators of the journal's publishing institution.
  2. Evaluators can accept/reject their role as evaluators at the time of receiving the works.
  3. Evaluators must issue their assessment through a rubric that covers the following aspects: Content, Bibliography, Impact of the topic, Methodology and General assessment.
  4. The evaluation process may involve more than one round of review: each round has a minimum period of 4 (four) weeks and is submitted to at least 2 (two) evaluators who are specialists in the subject.
  5. The editorial decision on the works is made by the Executive Editor upon receipt of the reviews. The options are: Acceptance of the work for publication, Acceptance subject to modifications, Rejection & Archive.
  6. The evaluation process allows for constant feedback with the authors and proofreaders .
  7. The period between receipt of the work and notification of the editorial decision will depend on the response times between all those involved and will be less than 3 (three) months.