Peer review policy

The journal editor will inform the author within 10 days as to whether the manuscript has been rejected or accepted for evaluation by the reviewers.

In the case of a review process, two or more external expert will be assigned to confidentially and anonymously evaluate the article (double-blind review). They will use the online reviewer form for their report.

Duration of the manuscript review process: the average time taken for the scientific evaluation of papers submitted to the Tecnología, Ciencia y Educación journal is currently 110 days. The peer review process is carried out as follows:

• The editor will send the author the review reports received in the first round of evaluation. The report will contain the reviewers' assessments, indicating the necessary suggestions for improvement or, where appropriate, the decision to reject the manuscript. If improvements are required, the author will have a maximum of 30 days to submit the corrected manuscript to the editor, together with a document responding to the reviewers' reports. The editor, within a maximum of 15 days, will assess the suitability of the changes made by the author and, if appropriate, will inform him of the acceptance to continue with the editorial process (resolution of doubts by the person in charge of proofreading, layout, etc.) until the definitive publication of the article or, on the contrary, the need to initiate a second round of evaluation.
• This second round of evaluation will be initiated if the suggestions for improvement made by the reviewers in the first round require substantial changes to the manuscript or if the changes submitted by the authors need to be assessed in greater depth. Preferably, it will be carried out by the same reviewers.
  After receiving the new evaluation reports from the second round, the editor will send it again to the author, who will have a maximum of 30 days to submit the corrected manuscript in response to the second evaluation reports, together with the corresponding justification document. Once the new manuscript and the document in response to the review have been received, the editor, within a maximum of 15 days, will assess the suitability of the changes made by the author and, if appropriate, will inform him of the acceptance to continue with the editorial process (resolution of doubts by the person in charge of spell-checking, layout, etc.) until the definitive publication of the article or, on the contrary, its rejection.
• In case there are contradictions between the judgements made by the reviewers (e.g., one reviewer is of the opinion that the article should be rejected and a second reviewer gives a favourable judgement for publication, with minor changes) or the editor is not fully convinced by the justification accompanying the judgement made by one reviewer, the article will be sent to a third reviewer. Following their report, the editor will make a decision on acceptance or rejection.

The journal has a database for internal use that processes and registers the transfer of articles and the set of reviewers. The list of reviewers in the one-year review period will be published thereafter. Reviewers receive an annual certificate of participation as reviewers of the publication, regardless of the number of articles they have reviewed per year.