Reviewers
As indicated in the section "Peer review process", external reviewers will receive a request to review manuscripts on the topic they have been accredited as experts on, which they can accept or decline within a period of no more than 48 hours. In order to be able to carry out a new assignment as soon as possible, thus avoiding an excessive delay in the review process. Once the assignment has been accepted, the reviewers will have a maximum of 5 weeks to make their reasoned recommendation (See sections of the journal: Subject matter and scope and Peer review process) and see whether they recommend acceptance directly or with modifications or the withdrawal of the article for RIAA.
Together with the application you will receive a full-text manuscript in Word format, anonymous and without trace of authorship of the document. In addition, they will receive a report template, which they will have to complete by evaluating different aspects of the manuscript, as well as accompanying a developed text of unlimited length in which to make indications and observations to the authors, indicating line number, or page, paragraph and line. On the report form, in each case, provided to the reviewers (see model at the end of the section), the recommendation made by the reviewers has the following options: rejected, complete revision, accepted with corrections, and/or accepted without restrictions.
We insist on the fact that all the indications are made on the aforementioned template-report, and not on the manuscript, leaving the modification of the full text to the authors in response to the reviewers' observations.
The reviewers will also receive access to the journal's guidelines for reviewers or instructions for authors, so that they can be taken into account in the evaluation.
The reviewers will receive two documents for supposed second and third rounds of review, the template-report with the authors' responses (green colour) giving satisfaction to the reviewer's indications, and the full text with the modifications motivated by the observations of both reviewers in green lettering.
