E-ISSN: 2806-5913
Abbreviated title: Resofro
Frequency: 6 issues per year
DOI: 10.59814/resofro
First Published: September 2021
Email: contacto@revistasocialfronteriza.com
- Editorial: Revista Social Fronteriza
peer review
Articles received in the Revista Social Fronteriza are peer-reviewed through the double-blind system and in accordance with the journal's established peer-review principles.
The papers that the Editorial Committee considers comply with the editorial policy and the academic interest of the Revista Social Fronteriza are submitted to the peer review process. This process consists of:
1) First review. The journal's editorial committee identifies whether the manuscript complies with the editorial line and the publication standards established in the authors' guide (approximately one week).
2) Second review. Depending on the subject matter of the manuscript, a section editor evaluates the relevance, pertinence and depth of the manuscript, and also defines whether to initiate peer review (one to two weeks).
3) Third review. The manuscript is sent to three peers for double-blind peer review. On average, more than 85% of the reviewers are from institutions other than the journal (up to one month).
The decision may be: approved without changes, approved subject to minor changes, approved subject to major changes, rejected not publishable.
All decisions are communicated by mail to the corresponding author, through the journal's management system, within eight to nine weeks from the date of receipt of the original. If the manuscript is accepted with minor or major changes, these must be sent within the period indicated by the journal.
The papers that the Editorial Committee considers comply with the editorial policy and the academic interest of the Revista Social Fronteriza are submitted to the peer review process. This process consists of:
1) First review. The journal's editorial committee identifies whether the manuscript complies with the editorial line and the publication standards established in the authors' guide (approximately one week).
2) Second review. Depending on the subject matter of the manuscript, a section editor evaluates the relevance, pertinence and depth of the manuscript, and also defines whether to initiate peer review (one to two weeks).
3) Third review. The manuscript is sent to three peers for double-blind peer review. On average, more than 85% of the reviewers are from institutions other than the journal (up to one month).
The decision may be: approved without changes, approved subject to minor changes, approved subject to major changes, rejected not publishable.
All decisions are communicated by mail to the corresponding author, through the journal's management system, within eight to nine weeks from the date of receipt of the original. If the manuscript is accepted with minor or major changes, these must be sent within the period indicated by the journal.
It is important to note that manuscripts submitted to Revista Social Fronteriza are privileged communications that are the private and confidential property of the authors, and authors may be harmed by premature disclosure of any or all of the details of a manuscript.
Therefore, reviewers should keep manuscripts and the information they contain strictly confidential. Reviewers should not publicly discuss authors' work and should not appropriate authors' ideas before the manuscript is published. Reviewers should not keep the manuscript for their personal use and should destroy copies of manuscripts after submitting their reviews.
Reviewers who seek the assistance of a trainee or colleague in conducting a review should acknowledge the contributions of these individuals in written comments sent to the editor. These individuals must maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript as described above.
Reviewers are expected to respond promptly to requests for review and to submit reviews within the agreed time. Reviewers' comments should be constructive, honest, and polite.
Reviewers should declare their relationships and activities that could bias their evaluation of a manuscript and recuse themselves from the peer review process if a conflict exists.
Therefore, reviewers should keep manuscripts and the information they contain strictly confidential. Reviewers should not publicly discuss authors' work and should not appropriate authors' ideas before the manuscript is published. Reviewers should not keep the manuscript for their personal use and should destroy copies of manuscripts after submitting their reviews.
Reviewers who seek the assistance of a trainee or colleague in conducting a review should acknowledge the contributions of these individuals in written comments sent to the editor. These individuals must maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript as described above.
Reviewers are expected to respond promptly to requests for review and to submit reviews within the agreed time. Reviewers' comments should be constructive, honest, and polite.
Reviewers should declare their relationships and activities that could bias their evaluation of a manuscript and recuse themselves from the peer review process if a conflict exists.
