Peer Review Process
The texts (articles and reviews) submitted to the calls for papers are initially evaluated for their scientifically consolidated nature, social relevance, and alignment with the guidelines of EccoS.
All submitted articles undergo similarity verification through iThenticate – for access to the Academic Integrity Policy, click here.
When the submitted work is neither original nor appropriate and timely according to EccoS's editorial policy, it will be archived.
Once the originality, adequacy, and timeliness of the submitted text are verified, the evaluation proceeds with the double-blind peer review system, conducted by ad hoc reviewers – experts designated based on the topic and/or theoretical frameworks of the submitted work. In general, the reviewers are professors and researchers affiliated with postgraduate programs at national or international higher education institutions (HEIs).
After carefully examining the submitted article or review, the reviewer must conclude their respective analytical-critical report with one of the following recommendations:
- accept;
- accept with corrections or modifications;
- reject.
For acceptance, at least two favorable reviews are required, and in case of divergence between the reviews, the submitted texts may be forwarded to a third reviewer at the discretion of the editor(s).
When one or both reviewers request revisions, the work is returned to the author, who should consider the reviews and revise the text, which, once revised, must be resubmitted for reevaluation.
Rejected work is archived; accepted work moves to the editing phase.
Articles accepted for publication may undergo editorial revisions to improve clarity and understanding, without altering their content.
The editors will decide in which issue and which section of the journal the article will be published.
