The double-blind peer review process
It is based on a double-blind peer review (the reviewers do not know each other and do not know the author(s)). It comprises two experts in the disciplines addressed by the article applications, acting as external guest reviewers to read and analyze them. They determine the validity of the theoretical contents, methodology, results, and possible scientific impact. The portfolio of referees of Scientia et PRAXIS comprises international and national experts, preferably members of the National System of Researchers (SNI) belonging to the National Council of Humanities, Sciences, and Technologies (CONAHCYT) of Mexico. The average evaluation time for approved articles is 90 days. A publication will be considered valid when both referees have accepted it. In case of controversy, the Editorial Board will appoint a third arbitrator who will act as an Adjudicator. In the first instance, other situations described here will be resolved by the Editor-in-Chief of the Journal and its Editorial Board. The journal referees are carefully selected from among the most competent people in the specialty of the work being evaluated.