Peer Review Process

At Editorial Connection, we guarantee the quality and academic rigor of our publications through a double-blind peer review process. This procedure ensures impartiality, objectivity and confidentiality in the evaluation of manuscripts, allowing us to select works with high academic and scientific impact.

Stages of the Review Process

Initial Editorial Evaluation

  • Compliance with formal requirements, structure and citation standards (APA format, latest edition) is reviewed.
  • The originality of the content is verified using anti-plagiarism tools.
  • If the manuscript meets the basic criteria, expert reviewers on the subject are assigned.

Assignment of Reviewers

  • Two experts in the discipline of the manuscript are selected to carry out the evaluation.
  • The double-blind system is applied, where the identity of authors and reviewers remains anonymous.
  • The reviewers accept the review, committing to carry it out with objectivity, confidentiality and professional ethics.

Peer Evaluation

The reviewers analyze aspects such as:

  • Originality and relevance of the content.
  • Methodological rigor and quality of the data presented.
  • Coherence in the argumentation and structure of the book.
  • Adequate citation and bibliographical references.

They issue a report with recommendations and one of the following decisions:

  • Accepted without changes: The manuscript is approved for publication.
  • Accepted with minor modifications: An editorial correction is requested without the need for a new review.
  • Major revision: Significant changes and a new peer evaluation are required.
  • Rejected: The manuscript does not meet the academic and editorial criteria.

Communication of Results and Corrections

  • Authors receive a report with the reviewers' observations and recommendations.
  • A deadline is given to make corrections and resubmit the adjusted version of the manuscript.
  • If additional revisions are required, the manuscript is subject to a new round of evaluation.

Editorial Decision

  • After validation of the changes, the editorial committee issues the final decision on publication.
  • Approved manuscripts move on to the editing and layout phase.

Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers base their evaluation on the following aspects:

  • Scientific relevance and originality of the content.
  • Methodological and argumentative quality.
  • Clarity in the presentation and structuring of the book.
  • Compliance with editorial and ethical standards.

Confidentiality and Ethics in Review

  • Reviewers must maintain strict confidentiality regarding the evaluated manuscript.
  • The use of information contained in the manuscripts for personal or academic purposes is prohibited before publication.
  • Any conflict of interest must be disclosed to the publisher before accepting the review.

Review Process Timeframes

  • Preliminary evaluation: 2 weeks.
  • Peer review: 4 to 6 weeks.
  • Corrections and re-evaluation (if applicable): 2 to 4 weeks.
  • Final editorial decision: 2 weeks.

Commitment to Editorial Quality

  • At Editorial Connection, we promote a transparent, rigorous and ethical review process, ensuring that our publications maintain high standards of scientific quality.