Peer Review Process

Revista Estrabão adopts exclusively a double-blind peer review model for all submitted manuscripts.

Under this model, the identities of authors and reviewers remain mutually anonymous throughout the entire evaluation process, ensuring impartiality, fairness, and scientific integrity.

Stages of the Peer Review Process

1. Editorial screening (Editor-in-Chief)

All manuscripts undergo an initial assessment conducted by the Editor-in-Chief, who verifies:

  • compliance with the Author Guidelines;

  • alignment with the journal’s aims and scope;

  • conformity with basic standards of originality and academic integrity.

Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be rejected at this stage or returned to the authors for preliminary adjustments.

2. Assignment to a Section Editor

Manuscripts deemed admissible are assigned to a Section Editor, who is responsible for conducting and supervising the peer review process.

3. Selection of reviewers

The Section Editor invites external and independent reviewers with proven expertise in the manuscript’s subject area.

Reviewers do not have access to the authors’ identities, and authors do not have access to the reviewers’ identities.

4. Peer review evaluation

Reviewers assess the manuscript in a critical, objective, and confidential manner, considering, among other aspects:

  • scientific relevance;

  • theoretical consistency;

  • methodological adequacy;

  • clarity in the presentation of results;

  • contribution to the field of knowledge.

Review reports are submitted confidentially to the Section Editor.

5. Editorial decision

Based on the reviewers’ reports, the Section Editor consolidates the evaluation and issues an editorial recommendation (acceptance, request for revisions, or rejection).

The final decision is validated by the Editor-in-Chief, ensuring editorial oversight and institutional responsibility.

6. Revisions (when applicable)

When revisions are requested:

  • authors must submit a revised version accompanied by a detailed response to the reviewers’ comments;

  • the Section Editor evaluates the revisions made;

  • when necessary, the manuscript may be sent back to the original reviewers.

7. Editorial arbitration

In cases of substantially divergent reviews or relevant controversies, the Section Editor, in conjunction with the Editor-in-Chief, may request an additional review from a member of the Editorial Board to support a collegial editorial decision.

Confidentiality and Integrity

All manuscripts and review reports are treated as confidential documents.
Authors, editors, and reviewers must take appropriate measures to prevent mutual identification during the review process, including removing authorship information from the manuscript text and file properties.

Timelines

Revista Estrabão seeks to conduct the peer review process within reasonable timeframes, in accordance with international best editorial practices. Currently, the average time to first decision is 30 days, counted from the date of submission. Actualmente, el tiempo promedio para la primera decisión es de 30 días, contados a partir de la fecha de envío.

Ethics and Conflicts of Interest

Editors and reviewers must disclose potential conflicts of interest and recuse themselves from the evaluation when appropriate.
Comprehensive ethical guidelines and standards of editorial conduct are available on the Ethics and Malpractice page.

Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI)

Revista Estrabão establishes specific guidelines for the ethical and transparent use of generative Artificial Intelligence technologies. Full policies are available on the Ethics and Malpractice page.