Research articles will undergo a double-blind, peer review. This also applies to manuscripts submitted as part of a special issue and all articles.
The decision of the reviewers will be acknowledged by the Revista Pacha Editors in accordance with eligibility for publication. Authors will be informed of the review decision and all relevant comments will be forwarded to authors.
Editorial Committee
All articles are reviewed by the Editorial Committee, which verifies due compliance with the criteria requested in the Instructions for Authors and decides if the subject of the article is relevant to the journal. Failure to comply with any of these guidelines will result in a request for modification of the article or its rejection.
Peer reviewers
After being reviewed by the Editorial Committee, articles are submitted for double-blind peer review. The reviewers are active researchers, not affiliated to the institution, who will evaluate the scientific and academic quality of the manuscripts. Reviewers may advise whether the articles should be accepted, considered acceptable with revisions, or rejected. If the article requires revising, authors must make the adjustments suggested by the peers within the following 7 calendar days.
Editor’s decision
The editor considers the Editorial Committee’s recommendations and the reviewers’ opinion before deciding whether an article should be published or rejected.
Response to authors
Revista Pacha will notify the authors about the editorial committee’s decision to accept or reject the article for peer review within a term of 30 calendar days.
Revista Pacha will notify the authors about the peers’ decision (acceptance or rejection) within a term of 90 calendar days.
FORMAT REVIEW
RESEARCH ARTICLES
About the objective of peer review.
Remember, peer-review is intended to determine whether the manuscript in question is appropriate for publication. This is based on factors such as the scientific quality and relevance of the writing, as well as the clarity of writing among others, which helps to improve the quality of research and presentation of proposals before being published.
Therefore, the main objective of the article is to improve the quality of the assigned article. For this, we ask you to make constructive suggestions and criticisms, with respect to the work done by the author.
About the evaluation rubric.
For the evaluation of the article, you will be provided with a form on the web page, but you can also make more specific annotations and comments in the Microsoft Word file of the article.
- A form with specific items will be displayed, please read carefully and respond in each box. Remember that the form will be read by the editor and also by the author.
- If you make annotations to the file, at the end of submitting the review form, a section will appear to upload files, please upload it there. Before uploading remember to delete its file name to keep the revision double-blind.
Suggestions.
-Initially perform a quick reading of the article to get a general idea of the article.
-Check the components of the formulary so that you know which areas are important to the journal and to pay more attention to them when performing the evaluation.
-Make a second reading and write the comments and suggestions you think are necessary.
-If you have any questions, please contact the editor who assigned you the article.
REVIEW FORM
- ARTICLE TITLE
Does the title say precisely what the study is about?
Does it have a maximum of 20 words?
Do not use acronyms.
You can also give suggestions or alternative titles.
- ABSTRACT
The article presents an ABSTRACT with a clear structure:
The author must not provide information or a conclusion that is not present in the text, nor should he cite bibliographical references.
The author must make clear the problem under investigation, the main objectives, and scope of the research, describe the methodology used, summarize the results, and generalize the main conclusions.
- KEYWORDS
Will keywords help readers find the article?
Are they specific and represent the content of the manuscript?
Are they separated by semicolons (;)?
- INTRODUCTION
Are the following elements present?
Importance of the topic
Conceptual or historical background of the topic
Definition of the problem.
Objectives of the Article
Must contain a clear and simple approach to the problem, the previous references to address it, the possible questions and assumptions that guided the work, the objective and approach that the author used.
- METHODOLOGY
The evaluation of this section varies greatly depending on the type of article, especially in Humanities. The objective of this section in general terms should expose a clear methodology that the author used for the elaboration of his research or an academic proposal.
However, in some cases, you can apply the following instructions.
The methods section should give enough readers information so that they can undertake an investigation or understand how their investigation was developed. (Always according to the type of article)
It should be clear from the Methods section how all of the data in the Results section were obtained.
The study system should be clearly described. For example, researchers need to specify the number of study subjects; how, when, and where the subjects were recruited.
In most cases, the experiments should include appropriate controls or comparators.
The outcomes of the study should be defined.
The methods used to analyze the data must be statistically sound.
For qualitative studies and established qualitative research methods (e.g. grounded theory is often used in sociology) must be used as appropriate for the study question.
If the authors used a technique from a published study, they should include a citation and a summary of the procedure in the text.
All materials and instruments should be identified, including the supplier’s name and location. For example, “Tests were conducted with a Vulcanizer 2.0 (XYZ Instruments, Mumbai, India).”
The Methods section should not have information that belongs in another section (such as the Introduction or Results).
- RESULTS
Depending on the article, you can be guided by some of the following instructions:
- There is a clear division of the different moments proposed in the text
- The wording is clear, and the information is presented in an organized and chronological way
- The ideas that the author wants to expose are clearly understood.
- The ideas and proposals are well-founded.
- The sources used by the author are sufficient (current, relevant, from prominent authors) or the author must add more information and authors.
- The author uses only specific information, not getting bogged down in ideas that are not relevant to the objective of the article.
- The author makes unnecessary quotes and redundant, obvious explanations. (Please indicate which ones)
- Use the quotes correctly.
- If the author uses tables and graphs. Place the title above and the source below.
- DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
Depending on the type of article, some authors will skip this section, the Discussion. In some cases, the author may be suggested including this section and ending with the conclusion.
Some suggestions for this final section:
- Does the discussion fit with the aims of the study stated in the Introduction?
- Have the authors adequately compared their findings with the findings of other studies?
- Does previous research on this topic support or refute the findings? Do the authors discuss these other studies?
- Do the authors mention how the study’s results might influence future research?
- Are the limitations of the study noted? If not, what limitations have you found? Are the authors’ conclusions supported by their data? Have the authors overstated the importance of their findings? Are the conclusions supported by the data?
- Are important discussion points missing?
- Do the authors suggest future research on this topic?
- Do the authors discuss assumptions, limitations, and sources of bias?
- Have the authors overlooked critical references and/or only selected a biased range of papers?
- ABOUT THE ARTICLE
Select according to your criteria
- The article opens space for the development of new research
- The academic contribution is innovative and unprecedented.
- The article contributes to new disciplinary knowledge
- Is the theme of the article a significant contribution to the discipline, therefore, be well received and have an impact on the community?
- Comments and suggestions to the author
You can write suggestions or comments to the author to improve your research method, or you can also congratulate the author for certain affirmative actions in your text.