The double-blind peer review process

Scientia et PRAXIS follows a double-blind peer review process in accordance with international standards of editorial ethics and academic publishing. In this process, neither authors nor reviewers are aware of each other’s identities, ensuring objectivity, impartiality, and academic rigor throughout the evaluation.

Each manuscript is evaluated by two external experts in the article’s subject area, who assess its theoretical soundness, methodology, results, and scientific contribution. Reviewers are selected from the journal’s national and international referee portfolio, preferably professor-researchers affiliated with Mexico’s National System of Researchers (SNII–SECIHTI) or qualified scholars from abroad. The maximum review period from submission to final decision is 12 weeks (90 days).

In cases of conflicting evaluations, the Editorial Board appoints a third adjudicating reviewer. The Editor-in-Chief, in consultation with the Scientific Committee, makes the final editorial decision. All reviewers are selected based on their expertise, academic background, and absence of conflicts of interest.

Editorial Process Stages

  1. Submission and Initial Review (1–2 weeks)
    The Editor-in-Chief and Associate Editor review the manuscript’s format, structure, and compliance with editorial guidelines.

  2. Content Analysis (1 week)
    The Editorial Board and Section Editors conduct an initial reading to evaluate relevance, quality, and originality, including plagiarism detection with iThenticate.

  3. Double-Blind Peer Review (6–7 weeks)
    The Associate Editor assigns the manuscript to two external reviewers. Each reviewer submits a detailed report with recommendations (accept, minor revision, major revision, reject).

  4. Feedback and Revisions (2 weeks)
    The Associate Editor communicates reviewer feedback and oversees the resubmission of revised manuscripts, which may be re-evaluated by the same reviewers.

  5. Final Editorial Decision
    If both reviewers agree, the article proceeds. In case of disagreement, a third reviewer is appointed. The Editor-in-Chief, supported by the Scientific Committee, issues the final decision.

  6. Editing, Copyediting, and Layout
    The Associate Editor supervises orthotypographic and stylistic editing. Articles are formatted into PDF and EPUB, and an inclusive audiovisual resource is integrated.

  7. Publication and Indexing
    The final version is published on the journal’s OJS platform and submitted to academic databases and indexing systems.

Roles of Editorial Bodies

  • The Editorial Board supports preliminary evaluations, recommends reviewers, and proposes thematic sections.

  • The Scientific Committee strengthens academic quality, contributes expert assessments, and ensures alignment with the journal’s mission.

  • The Associate Editor maintains direct communication with authors, manages reviewer reports, and oversees the editorial workflow.

This comprehensive process guarantees the scientific integrity, transparency, and reliability of the works published in Scientia et PRAXIS, in full accordance with the principles of COPE, DOAJ, Latindex Catalog 2.0, and international indexing standards.