Peer review process

For the arbitration of the articles, peer review will be anonymous; where the evaluators do not know the identity of the authors of the articles, and the authors do not know the identity of the evaluators.

Peer review process

  1. All proposals for publication must be submitted through the Open Journal System (OJS), in order to guarantee the electronic and auditable record of the interactions between the journal and the authors.
  2. The editorial process begins with the reception of the article through the Open Journal System (OJS), in the first instance an editorial audit is performed, when this is favorable, the process of sending to external evaluators begins, it is projected that from this stage until the verdict of arbitration, will be a maximum of 10 weeks, provided that there are no external conditions that may affect the periodicity indicated, for which, the author or authors will be informed in a timely manner, about the novelty.
  3. All proposals for publication will be submitted to an editorial audit process in order to determine whether the topic is of interest to the Revista Multidisciplinaria Perspectivas Investigativas (RMPI), through its scope and objective, as well as full compliance with the rules of authorship.
  4. If the submitted topic is of interest, but the manuscript does not comply with all the authors' standards, it will be returned with the appropriate observations in order to correct the situation, the article must be resubmitted through the Open Journal System (OJS).
  5. Once the editorial audit is approved, the article will be sent to the referees under the double-blind peer-review system (Double-blind peer-review).
  6. An evaluation instrument will be used for this purpose, which must be filled out by the referees and sent to the journal for the verdict, if there is a discrepancy in the result, the evaluation of a third reviewer will be requested, to achieve uniformity of criteria, with the majority decision prevailing.
  7. When the final verdict is obtained, the decision will be communicated to the author(s) as follows: a) Accepted: It will undergo grammatical revision, layout and publication in the next available issue. b) Accepted with observations: The authors will be notified of the modifications to be made (maximum 15 continuous days to make the observations and send them back to the journal; failure to comply with this rule implies that the author or authors renounce the publication of the article). Once they have complied, the article will proceed to grammatical revision, layout and publication in the next available issue. c) Not accepted or approved: The authors will be notified of the reason for rejection based on the verdict of the jurors.
  8. The arbitration decision is final and cannot be appealed by the author(s).
  9. Once the article has been approved, the editorial team will review the manuscript again to check for possible grammatical or editorial errors. If there are no problems at this point, the article will be sent to layout and production; if not, the authors will be notified of the observations to be considered.
  10. The grammatical revision will be the responsibility of the author(s) and must be carried out within a maximum of 8 continuous days, during which time the article must be returned to the journal for verification. Failure to comply with this rule implies that the author or authors renounce the publication of the article.
  11. The main criteria to be evaluated in the article are: Originality, contribution to the state of the art, methodological rigor, quality of results and discussion, conclusion, writing, semantic coherence.
  12. In order to promote greater reliability in the evaluation, the referees will preferably be from different countries and institutions, thus promoting greater diversity of opinion.
  13. Situations that arise and are not contemplated in the evaluation process will be submitted to the consideration of the journal's editorial and scientific committee, taking as a reference the guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Good editorial practices

  1. Plagiarism: All publication proposals will be submitted for review by a text similarity check program. Proposals containing a high percentage of similarity will not be accepted (more than 10%).
  2. Inadequate authorship: Authors are responsible for the authors' participation in the authorship and order of appearance in the article; the journal has no interference in these aspects. Authors should not make changes in the number and order of authors once the editorial process has begun.
  3. Redundant publication (duplicate publication and fragmented publication): The Journal does not accept duplicate publication, in case of incurring in this fault and demonstrating its occurrence, the authors are subject to the guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
  4. In the event that any breach of publication ethics is detected at the beginning, during the editorial process or after publication, the Journal will take the necessary corrective measures based on the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (publicationethics.org), the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) (http://www.icmje.org/) and the Council of Science Editors (CSE) (https://www. councilscienceeditors.org/), which may include the rejection or retraction of the article, the prohibition of publication of future articles to all authors in the Journal, the notification to other journals, as well as the communication to the respective authorities (institution of origin, institution that financed the study, professional associations and ethics committees).
  5. Contributors are responsible for the authorship of the articles submitted to the Journal and declare that they are original, with no conflict of interest with third parties or institutions.
  6. Contributors who incur in plagiarism (any total or partial reproduction of content that is not cited) may not publish again in the Revista Multidisciplinaria Perspectivas Investigativas (RMPI),
  7. The article may not be submitted to different journals while it is being refereed in the Journal.
  8. If an article submitted to Revista Multidisciplinaria Perspectivas Investigativas (RMPI) is published in another journal, the collaborator or collaborators will be notified of the exclusion of said article and will not be able to submit articles to Revista Multidisciplinaria Perspectivas Investigativas (RMPI) for a period of 6 years,

Standards for Evaluators

General aspects:

A first review is carried out by the editor in conjunction with the editorial committee, with the intention of determining whether the article submitted complies with the editorial standards and is within the thematic areas of interest for publication in the journal, applying in this instance the detection of plagiarism by means of specialized software. If the article submitted does not comply with the above, it will be returned to the author (either for refusal before refereeing, corrections before refereeing or to recommend another journal according to the subject matter).

  1. The editorial process from receipt to the refereeing verdict to the author or authors by the journal will take a maximum of 10 weeks, provided that there are no external conditions that may affect the indicated periodicity, for which the author or authors will be informed in a timely manner about the novelty.

All manuscripts will be reviewed anonymously. Authors should suggest three possible reviewers they consider suitable to evaluate their work (the Revista Multidisciplinaria Perspectivas Investigativas (RMPI) is not obliged to send them for arbitration), clearly indicating their name and e-mail address. Likewise, authors may indicate any person who, for different reasons, they do not wish to see involved in the review process of their work.

Evaluation procedure:

  1. The evaluators will have a period of 30 continuous days, from the reception of the article, to send the evaluation report to the Director - Editor. The Director - Editor will send this report to the author within a maximum period of 5 continuous days.
  2. The work of the evaluators is strictly confidential. The journal is not responsible for the performance of the evaluators, who are completely autonomous.
  3. For the arbitration of articles, peer review will be anonymous or double-blind; where the evaluators do not know the identity of the authors of the articles, and the authors do not know the identity of the evaluators.
  4. Originality, pertinence, style and contributions to the field will be evaluated.
  5. The evaluators will use the instrument proposed by the journal for the evaluation of the article.
  6. Articles are refereed and classified in the following categories: Approved, Approved with modifications and Not Approved.
  7. Any matter not covered by the editorial guidelines will be at the discretion of the Editorial Committee.