ETHICAL GUIDELINES FOR REVIEWERS

Next, the editorial process of an article is described before being published and the guidelines that the evaluating peer should follow when reviewing an article submitted to the journal are defined.

Procedure for evaluation/arbitration of manuscripts

Before sending an article to the Jangwa Pana magazine make sure you comply with the instructions for authors. It is important that the author or authors guarantee that their manuscript has not been submitted simultaneously to other journals, which is original and unpublished.

Once received the items. The editorial team will make a first selection of the manuscripts, establishing the relevance of the manuscripts for the magazine Jangwa Pana. In this process, compliance with the rules for authors is verified, as well as the suitability and quality of the same. If the manuscript does not comply with the guidelines of the journal, it will be returned to the author for full application.

Manuscripts that comply with all the guidelines set out in the instructions for authors will be submitted to the evaluation of national or international anonymous peer reviewers (preferably not belonging to the publishing entity). The arbitration process is double blind; The evaluator will issue his concept about the manuscript and may make recommendations or request clarifications. This process can be supported by the editorial committee according to the needs that the editorial team presents in the selection process. The members of the editorial committee will be consulted collectively or individually as required by the editorial team of the magazine. The journal will send the concepts of evaluation to the authors within a period no longer than three months, time that starts from the sending of the manuscript to blind peers.

Possible results of the peer review

Evaluator # 1	Evaluator #2	Evaluator #3	Outcome
Approved	Approved		Approved
Approved with corrections	Approved with corrections		Request adjustments
Rejected	Rejected		Rejected
Rejected	Approved	Approved	Request adjustments
Rejected	Approved with corrections	Approved with corrections	Request adjustments
Rejected	Approved	Rejected	Rejected

In the event of a positive and a negative evaluation, the editor will decide on said controversy, for example, requesting a third evaluation or consulting the editorial committee, so that they can give a definitive verdict.

The observations of the evaluators, as well as those of the editorial team and committee, should be taken into account by the author, who will make the requested adjustments. The corrections and recommendations that the authors do not accept must be justified. These modifications and corrections to the manuscript must be made by the author within the period specified by the editor of the journal (approximately 15 days). In case of not responding during that time, the manuscript will be unsubscribed. After receiving the modified article, the author will be informed about its approval and the tentative date of publication (Jangwa Pana magazine reserves the right to decide in which number the article will be published). Every two months the editorial team will send a report to the editorial committee of the state of the articles in the process of evaluation, review of style and layout. This report includes the evaluations of blind peers, to verify the quality of the editorial process and endorse the arbitration process and the articles to be published.

The accepted articles will go through a process of correction of style and layout by the editing team. When you have the galley proof of the journal, the manuscript will be sent to the authors for review, this step is prior to the printing of the journal, it should be noted that the process of publication in the journal does not present any economic cost for the authors. This phase can take up to three months from the approval for publication of the document.

The editorial team reserves the last word on the publication of the articles and the number in which they will be published. The journal reserves the right to make minor style corrections. The final version of the manuscript, after being diagrammed, will be sent to the authors for final verification.

Ethics in research and publication is fundamental for the journal, therefore, in case of plagiarism or copyright violation, the manuscript will be rejected.

 Guide for reviewers

Before starting the review process, peer evaluators should consider the following:

• Agree to review only the manuscripts for which they have the necessary experience, in order to carry out an appropriate evaluation.

• Respect the confidentiality of the review and not disclose, beyond what is authorized by the journal, details of a manuscript or its review during or after the evaluation process.

• Do not use the information obtained during the review process for your benefit or that of any other person or organization or to the detriment or discredit of others.

• Declare all possible conflicts of interest, seeking advice from the journal when they are not sure if something constitutes a relevant interest.

• Do not allow your opinions to be influenced by the origin of a manuscript, by nationality, religious or political beliefs, or by commercial considerations.

• Be objective and constructive in their criticism, refraining from being hostile and making disparaging or defamatory comments against the work presented in the manuscripts.

• Recognize that peer review is vital for the improvement of manuscripts, so the reviewer must commit to carry out its evaluation at the time agreed by the journal.

• Provide the journal with accurate personal and professional information and real support of their experience.

• Recognize that the impersonation of another individual during the review process is considered a serious misconduct.

Bibliographic reference:

COPE. (2016). Committee on Publication Ethics: Basic principles to which peer reviewers should adhere Peer reviewers should. Recuperado de: http://publicationethics.org/about