Arbitration process
All contributions submitted to this journal go through a strict process of single-blind peer review, combined with double-blind. Each one is submitted to two evaluation filters to be accepted, which start once the current call for papers closes and consist of the following
- SIMPLE-BLIND DICTAMINATION : When the text arrives at the journal's e-mail address (horizontehistorico@hotmail.com), a quick check is made to observe compliance with the editorial guidelines established in the Guidelines for Authors, as well as to verify that the collaboration is totally original through anti-plagiarism systems such as iThenticate. Afterwards, it is evaluated by all the members of the Editorial Committee, who fill out a report with comments and specifications about the submission, providing a verdict of approval or rejection. The votes are counted at the end of the determined period of judgement and the result can be challenged by any member of the committee during the 24 hours immediately after the publication of the report for some important reason not taken into account by the others (plagiarism, big failures of quality, little contribution to the objectives, etc.), in which case the verdict is pending until the discussion of the members. If there is no challenge, the work is approved or not by majority and such information is communicated to the author via e-mail.
- DOUBLE-BLIND REVIEW: After the above, the collaboration is blindly reviewed by three people simultaneously: a teacher-researcher linked to the subject of study of the submission, a style editor and a specific member of the editorial committee. These reviews are sent to the journal's e-mail address after a certain time limit established by the editor, who is responsible for verifying the quality of each review before sending it to the author. In the case of reviews, they are only evaluated by two members of the editorial committee and a proofreader. Collaborations can no longer be rejected at this stage, only suggestions for necessary corrections are received.
The three reviews are sent to the participant, who has approximately two weeks to take into account the observations made by the reviewers and to finish their final version. The final version must be attached to the e-mail of the publication, and is not included if it is not delivered in time.
The final versions are received for the edition of the issue in question and its originality is checked again in the anti-plagiarism tool (iThenticate), before its digital publication in this page, which is notified to the authors through an email so they can visualize their collaboration.
