Peer evaluation

Each article received in "Argumentos," after passing the initial review (see Editorial Process), is sent to two peer reviewers for evaluation (to see what types of papers receive peer review, see the Section Policy). The editor typically selects the peers—based on the affinity between their fields of expertise and the article's topic—from among the national and international advisory committees.

The system used for peer review is double-blind. First, the article is anonymized. Any alterations made will be noted in the original, so that they can be reversed if the manuscript is approved. Second, this anonymized version is sent to the reviewers along with a form appropriate to the nature of the work. The form addresses various academic quality criteria (see Review Formats), whose fulfillment will merit a quantitative score from the reviewer. A reviewer's evaluation is considered favorable for publication if the total score awarded to the manuscript on the evaluation form exceeds two-thirds of the maximum possible score. The form includes a space for comments. In addition, although it is not mandatory, peer reviewers who wish to do so frequently make annotations on the manuscript. These observations and annotations are sent—also anonymized—to the authors. Based on the favorable evaluations of both reviewers, the editor decides whether to publish the article. In the event of a discrepancy between the opinions of both reviewers, the editor may choose to seek a third review or, if deemed appropriate, decide to publish or reject the article.