Peer Review Process

The Boletín Científico Ideas & Voces de la Academia applies a scientific evaluation system under the double-blind peer review model, ensuring confidentiality, impartiality, transparency, and academic quality throughout the editorial process.

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial editorial screening conducted by the Editorial Committee to verify compliance with formal requirements, thematic relevance, originality, editorial standards, and ethical publication principles.

During this preliminary stage, the following aspects are evaluated:

  • Consistency with the journal’s aims and scope.

  • Scientific and academic quality of the manuscript.

  • Compliance with submission and formatting guidelines.

  • Originality and similarity percentage through plagiarism detection software.

  • Methodological coherence and scientific contribution.

Manuscripts presenting substantial deficiencies, ethical concerns, high similarity levels, or lack of alignment with the journal’s editorial focus may be rejected during the initial editorial assessment (desk review) without external peer review. In cases of minor formal issues, manuscripts may be returned to the authors for corrections prior to entering the scientific evaluation process.

Once the manuscript successfully passes the editorial screening, it is submitted to external evaluation by at least two national or international reviewers with recognized expertise in the manuscript’s subject area. In cases of significant discrepancies between reviewers’ reports, the Editorial Committee may appoint a third reviewer whose assessment will contribute to the final editorial decision.

Reviewers may issue one of the following recommendations:

  • Accept submission.

  • Publishable with minor revisions.

  • Publishable with major revisions.

  • Resubmit for further review.

  • Reject submission.

The peer review process considers scientific and editorial criteria aimed at ensuring the quality and academic impact of published works, including:

  • Originality, innovation, and scientific relevance.

  • Contribution to the advancement of knowledge.

  • Theoretical and methodological rigor.

  • Scientific validity and reliability of results.

  • Logical structure and argumentative coherence.

  • Academic writing quality.

  • Appropriate and updated bibliographic references.

  • Ethical relevance and compliance with good scientific practices.

  • Potential academic impact and knowledge transfer.

The final decision regarding acceptance or rejection of manuscripts rests with the Editorial Committee, based on reviewers’ reports and the journal’s editorial policies.

The journal promotes agile, transparent, and efficient editorial processes. Authors will receive periodic notifications regarding the status of their submissions through the OJS platform and the registered email address provided during submission.

Editorial Transparency and Ethics Policy

The journal adheres to international editorial ethics standards and best scientific publishing practices, following the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), international scholarly communication guidelines, and principles of academic integrity applicable to open access scientific journals.

All participants involved in the editorial process — authors, reviewers, and editors — are expected to act according to principles of confidentiality, objectivity, scientific integrity, and ethical responsibility.

Guidelines for Reviewers

The Boletín Científico Ideas & Voces de la Academia maintains an international network of specialized reviewers composed of researchers and scholars with proven scientific expertise in the journal’s thematic areas.

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Maintain strict confidentiality regarding evaluated manuscripts.

  • Declare any potential conflicts of interest.

  • Provide objective, well-founded, and respectful evaluations.

  • Adhere to the ethical and scientific principles established by the journal.

  • Use the official manuscript evaluation protocol provided by the Editorial Committee.

In order to strengthen editorial transparency and academic recognition, the journal may annually publish the institutional list of participating reviewers while fully preserving the anonymity of the peer review process.

The entire review process is managed through the OJS platform, ensuring traceability, interoperability, and editorial monitoring in accordance with international standards for scientific publishing.