Guidelines for Reviewers

The peer review procedure will be managed through the magazine's digital platform. Under the double blind mode, the authors will not know the identity of the reviewers, and the reviewers will evaluate the contributions without knowing their authors. Those who are required to evaluate contributions have the obligation to maintain confidentiality or the obligation to keep secret and not disclose the document that they have been asked to arbitrate. They are therefore committed to maintaining total confidentiality regarding the data, results or any other knowledge that has been gained as a result of their work as evaluators, abstaining from using arguments, data or any other discovery contained in the articles until they are published.

If you decide not to carry out the revision, you must communicate this decision to the Editorial Committee and ideally make suggestions regarding other possible qualified reviewers for the proposed document.

To accept the arbitration of the proposed document, the reviewer will have to select a series of items that are presented and ordered in the evaluation format that exists for this purpose on the magazine's digital platform.

The result of your evaluation will consist of the responses in the aforementioned evaluation format (editable online or downloadable from the magazine's web), and a copy of the revised document in which all comments, observations and corrections that you consider pertinent are included. Both elements, responses to the form and document with observations, will be managed on the magazine's digital platform, as a last resort they can be sent by email to the address fondoeditorial@unamad.edu.pe.

Responsibilities of dictaminators

1. It will accept the revision of texts that suit its area of ​​specialty, in order to carry out an appropriate evaluation.
2. You will declare from the beginning of the process whether there is a conflict of interest. If you suspect the identity of the author(s) you must notify the magazine if this knowledge raises a possible conflict of interest.
3. The review will be rejected immediately if it is not possible to deliver it within the agreed time frame.
4. It will issue its evaluation based on originality, the contribution of the article to the theme, the methodology employed, the relevance and actuality of the bibliography used; the style, the coherence and the quality in the structure and in the writing of the text.
5. It will inform the magazine immediately if during the evaluation it finds or discovers that it does not have the necessary experience to evaluate all aspects of the text.
6. Your criticisms will be objective, specific and constructive.
7. It will clearly define the approval, rejection or conditioning of the text.
8. It will issue its evaluation within the agreed period.
9. Confidentiality will be respected during and after the evaluation process.
10. The content of the revised or revised text will not be used.
11. It will not involve other people in the revision that was requested.
12. Communicating to the magazine if it detects similarities in the text with another that has already been revised or if it identifies any type of plagiarism.
13. It is not permitted to transfer the responsibility for carrying out a dictation to anyone else, assistant or collaborator.