Peer reviewing

Papers submitted are subjected to a review and selection process by OJS (Open Journal Systems). Paper analysis and final selection are in charge of the Section Director and/or Editor, who accepts or rejects original submissions according to scientific quality, accordance with topics proper of the Journal, and validity of results. Additionally, he/she can ask for changes and make necessary recommendations so that the document can meet the Journal requirements.

After this revision, papers will be sent to external double-blind peer reviewing within five days. This review should be conducted by national and international expert doctors in the related area.

Due to blind peer reviewing, the author/s’ and peer reviewers’ anonymity is ensured.

Peer reviewers will make a final decision, which may be of three types:

1. a) Publishable: The paper is accepted for publication with no changes.
2. b) Publishable: The authors must make changes:

1. Accepted with minor changes. No further reviewing is required.
2. Accepted with major changes. Further assessment is required.

1. c) Non-publishable: The paper is rejected.

Concerning research papers, if peer reviewers make a thoroughly different assessment, a third casting peer review will be conducted. This situation may be solved by the Journal Director.

Peer reviewers will give their expert opinion in 15 working days. Their decision will be informed to the author via OJS, so that he/she can make the corrections suggested, which will be later verified by  the Journal.

The Director or Sub-Director will inform the author/s the acceptance of the paper for publication.

As of 2023, and by virtue of the promotion of transparency and good academic practices in the editorial process of the “Cuadernos de Teología UCN” Magazine, the editorial team has decided that any peer reviewer that collaborates will be mentioned in an annual report, as part of the exercise to strengthen the academic community.