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 consists of two experts in the disciplines addressed by the article applications, acting as external guest reviewers to read and analyze them. They determine both the validity of the theoretical contents, its methodology, the results, and its possible scientific impact. The portfolio of referees of Scientia et PRAXIS comprises international and national experts, with 100% of the latter being 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. Other situations than those described here will be resolved in the first instance 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.