Arbitration system

Referee System (peer review)
Manuscript evaluation guidelines for reviewers

The editorial committee of the Universidad, Ciencia y Tecnología journal is a collegiate team of national and international professional experts with high professional and research prestige in their specific areas, who guarantee the quality of the papers received for publication, complying with the rules of the journal and under the double-blind scheme. Furthermore, this team of professionals aims to review the formal and substantive aspects of the papers to meet international standards of quality, rigor, novelty, initiative, originality, writing, and other characteristics of a research paper.

The authors receive a peer review report, which includes the aspects that must be improved so that the work may or may not continue its publication process. This review process is confidential, objective, and precise in wording their comments on the documents processed for publication. The process is done through the OJS platform or by e-mail.

The team of reviewers and editors is public and is available at the following link.

1. Acceptance/rejection criteria for manuscript evaluation

The editors of Universidad, Ciencia y Tecnología Journal request through an invitation the collaboration of reviewers, considering the expertise in the subject according to their professional background. The participation of reviewers is fundamental for the publication process. Therefore the evaluation for the selection of a reviewer is subject to the following:

  a. Professional competence and experience in the subject of the article.

  b. Availability of time and disposition.

  c. Conflict of interest. If the reviewer detects any personal relationship with the authors, the university involved, or the group of researchers, the reviewer may refuse to act as a reviewer.

  d. Confidentiality: The review cannot be shared with third parties. Any concerns regarding the study should be consulted with the editor.

The reviewer must notify the editor of the reasons for not reviewing the manuscript.

2. Reviewing

The reviewers have the function of attending to the manuscripts objectively and providing the necessary information to ensure that they comply with the quality aspects of content and format, so they should evaluate the research characteristics and contribute constructive corrections to improve it, both in substance and form.

The reviewers will issue a report to the authors specifying the observations to be made to improve the manuscript. This report includes, as has been highlighted, all aspects of form and content so that the research can be published.

3. General criteria for evaluation of the manuscript

The fundamental criteria that the reviewers will consider for the manuscript to be adequate will be the following:

The originality of the manuscript. The papers to be published must comply with originality, so reviewers may rely on publication tools to validate the relevance of the papers. Manuscripts should be written to guarantee the attractiveness and interest of the scientific community so that they meet modern research expectations and are adapted to current and scientifically relevant topics and requirements. The title should be written without the excess of words and with precision in the subject. The abstract should describe in a few words the work carried out, highlight the work done and the methods for its execution, and include a brief synthesis of the main conclusions reached. The introduction should summarize the work done within the subject, the background of the topic, and its relevance to the research described.

The rigor of the manuscript. The manuscript must comply with academic and research rigors. Therefore, the methodology must cover the methodological aspects of the research, considering the mathematical characteristics if applicable. The results should contain clearly and concisely the factors found in the study concerning the stated objectives. References should comply with the IEEE standards for the journal. They should include each of the works cited without exception and without adding another work that is not cited, for which the use of reference managers is suggested.

Clarity of the manuscript. The manuscript should be written in a clear, scientific, and technical manner, complying with the grammatical norms of the Real Academia Española in the case of papers in Spanish. Aspects of syntax and grammar will also be reviewed in the case of manuscripts submitted in other languages, such as English or Portuguese. Authors must strictly respect the journal's regulations for these aspects.

Relevance of the manuscript. The manuscript should have clear and well-written conclusions that value the research's significance and enhance the study's prospects.

4. Ethical reasons

Reviewers should verify the ethical conduct in the manuscripts and advise the editor of any doubts about ethical behavior.

5. Manuscript evaluation process in OJS

- Access the OJS system of the Universidad, Ciencia y Tecnología journal platform with your username and password using the URL.

6. Evaluation report

The reviewers must comply with the formats for peer review and may consider three possibilities:
Accepted without modifications: corresponds to those papers that comply with the characteristics of form and content required in the journal's regulations, which can be published in the issue where there is availability.

Accepted with modifications: corresponds to those papers that comply with the characteristics of form and content required by the journal's rules but require some improvements for their final publication.
Rejected: those papers that do not comply with the journal's guidelines will be rejected. Therefore, any manuscript submitted without the format and strict rules of the journal will not pass peer review and will be considered immediately REJECTED.

Comments should be clear, concise, objective, and supported so that the author and editors can understand the suggestions and the decision regarding the manuscript's acceptance or rejection. Therefore, reviewers must maintain formal and friendly language in their comments.

7. Manuscript evaluation aspects for external reviewers

Reviewers should review the following elements for the evaluation of papers submitted to the journal:

- Format of the journal, papers should fully comply with the format established in the journal and available at the URL.

- Appropriate subject matter for the journal.

- Abstract.

- Introduction and state of the art.

- Methodology.

- Results.

- Arrangement and description of tables and figures.

- Conclusions.

- References within the IEEE standard.

- Ethical considerations.

- Conflict of interest.

8. Instance that will approve the article after its evaluation.

The editorial committee will consider the revisions made by the reviewers. It will make a final review of the aspects observed for content improvements, thus ensuring the quality of the final manuscript.