About the Journal

Focus and Scope

PNA publishes both empirical studies and theoretical studies in Didactics of Mathematics, with a wide range of methodologies and research designs

Peer-Review Process

Manuscripts submitted to PNA are subjected to a double-blind peer-review process. The stages a manuscript goes through are:

As a first step, the editorial board verifies that the manuscript satisfies the requirements described in the instructions to the authors. In this step, it is verified, through a plagiarism verification system, if the document is original.

In a second step, the academic and scientific value of the document is examined through a double-blind review system with at least two reviewers, national or international, external to the publishing institution and experts in the area of Mathematics Education.

In a third phase, the editorial board, based on the general criteria of the journal and the reviews provided by external reviewers, decides if the manuscript:

  • (a) is accepted for publication;
  • (b) must be modified by the authors before being accepted, returning to the second step;
  • (c) is rejected.

The estimated response time is three months. For the final publication of the document, PNA reserves the right to make style or language revisions in order to achieve more clarity and conciseness of the text as well as to adjust to the publication format.

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

Copyright transfer agreement

Once the manuscript has been accepted, the authors will transfer the copyright to the journal, which will publish the article under the CC-BY-NC-ND license.

Publication ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

This journal is committed to upholding the integrity of the scientific record. According to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) the journal will follow the COPE guidelines on how to deal with potential acts of misconduct. Authors should refrain from misrepresenting research results which could damage the trust in the journal, the professionalism of scientific authorship, and ultimately the entire scientific endeavour. Maintaining integrity of the research and its presentation can be achieved by following the rules of good scientific practice, which include:

  • The manuscript has not been submitted to more than one journal for simultaneous consideration.
  • The manuscript has not been published previously (partly or in full), unless the new work concerns an expansion of previous work (please provide transparency on the re-use of material to avoid the hint of text-recycling (“self-plagiarism”)).
  • A single study is not split up into several parts to increase the quantity of submissions and submitted to various journals or to one journal over time (e.g. “salami-publishing”).
  • No data have been fabricated or manipulated (including images) to support your conclusions
  • No data, text, or theories by others are presented as if they were the author’s own (“plagiarism”). Proper acknowledgements to other works must be given (this includes material that is closely copied (near verbatim), summarized and/or paraphrased), quotation marks are used for verbatim copying of material, and permissions are secured for material that is copyrighted. Important note: the journal may use software to screen for plagiarism.
  • Consent to submit has been received explicitly from all co-authors, as well as from the responsible authorities - tacitly or explicitly - at the institute/organization where the work has been carried out, before the work is submitted.
  • Authors whose names appear on the submission have contributed sufficiently to the scientific work and therefore share collective responsibility and accountability for the results.
  • Authors are strongly advised to ensure the correct author group, corresponding author, and order of authors at submission. Changes of authorship or in the order of authors are not accepted after acceptance of a manuscript.
  • Adding and/or deleting authors at revision stage may be justifiably warranted. A letter must accompany the revised manuscript to explain the role of the added and/or deleted author(s). Further documentation may be required to support your request.
  • Requests for addition or removal of authors as a result of authorship disputes after acceptance are honored after formal notification by the institute or independent body and/or when there is agreement between all authors.
  • Upon request authors should be prepared to send relevant documentation or data in order to verify the validity of the results. This could be in the form of raw data, samples, records, etc. Sensitive information in the form of confidential proprietary data is excluded.

If there is a suspicion of misconduct, the journal will carry out an investigation following the COPE guidelines. If, after investigation, the allegation seems to raise valid concerns, the accused author will be contacted and given an opportunity to address the issue. If misconduct has been established beyond reasonable doubt, this may result in the Editor-in-Chief’s implementation of the following measures, including, but not limited to:

  • If the article is still under consideration, it may be rejected and returned to the author.
  • If the article has already been published online, depending on the nature and severity of the infraction, either an erratum will be placed with the article or in severe cases complete retraction of the article will occur. The reason must be given in the published erratum or retraction note. Please note that retraction means that the paper is maintained on the platform, watermarked "retracted" and explanation for the retraction is provided in a note linked to the watermarked article.
  • The author’s institution may be informed.

List of reviewers

From the PNA editorial team, we want to thank all the people who have collaborated with the journal and, especially, those who have dedicated their valuable time to review tasks, essential for PNA to continue publishing.