Peer Review

The journal is committed to a maximum peer review period of 2 months per article.

Before submitting a publication proposal, authors must consult the submission guidelines and the Author Guidelines. The article submission must be accompanied by a brief cover letter highlighting the work's contribution to the discipline and guaranteeing its originality, the responsibility of all authorships, and that it is not currently under review by another journal.

• Once a manuscript that meets all formal requirements is received, its receipt will be acknowledged, and its evaluation process will begin.

• Received articles undergo an initial review by the APJ Editorial Board, which will assess the quality and thematic suitability of the work. The Board may directly reject, without external review, those works that do not meet minimum requirements or do not align with the journal's scope. The Editorial Board may request the assistance of members of the Advisory Board if deemed necessary.

  From this point, a "double-blind" peer review process begins, ensuring that neither authors nor reviewers know each other's identities. The articles will be sent to two external reviewers, specialists in the subject matter or relevant line of research, along with the article review form (link to the form, Evaluation Sheet, or Protocol). These reviewers will be responsible for assessing and judging the originality, novelty, relevance, and methodological quality of the manuscripts. The evaluation reports will be forwarded to the journal's Editorial Board via a specific form.

• In the event of conflicting evaluations, or if deemed necessary for any other reason, the Editorial Board may send the manuscript to a third reviewer.
• Based on the reviewers' reports, the Editorial Board may make one of the following decisions, which will be communicated to the author:

• • Accept as is (or with minor modifications).

  • Accept with revisions: In this case, publication will be contingent upon the author making all the changes requested by the editorial team. The deadline to complete these changes will be 1 month. The author must attach a brief explanatory report detailing the changes made and how they address the Editorial Board's requirements. Among the proposed changes may be a recommendation to adapt the study for a different section of the journal.

  • Reject with the option to resubmit: The work is not publishable in its current state, but the author has the possibility of rewriting and resubmitting it. In this case, submitting a new version does not guarantee publication; rather, the peer review process will start over from the beginning.

  • Reject: The work is not publishable.

• APJ is committed to publishing an annual list of all individuals who have conducted anonymous peer reviews. Additionally, if verified, the journal may make public the following scientific malpractices: plagiarism, data falsification or fabrication, individual appropriation of collective authorship, and duplicate publication.