Editorial Process

The editorial process for "Argumentos" is carried out through the Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform, which is open-source journal management software developed, supported, and distributed free of charge by the Public Knowledge Project under the GNU General Public License. To submit an article to the journal and for the entire editorial process, you must use the OJS platform (see Instructions for Authors). The editorial process comprises three stages:

 

Stage One: Basic review of quality and alignment with the journal's focus and scope.

 

Articles are reviewed by the journal's editor to ensure they are unpublished, free of plagiarism (see Anti-Plagiarism Policy), meet minimum quality standards in terms of writing and scientific rigor, and adhere to the journal's focus and scope (see Focus and Scope). Reviews and thesis summaries are reviewed by the Editorial Board; they do not undergo peer review.

Possible outcomes of this stage:

1. The article is sent for peer review.
2. The author is notified to request further information (for example, if there are questions about plagiarism, ethical attribution of authorship, etc.) or to request corrections to minor aspects of the article (for example, issues related to the writing).
3. The article is rejected.

 

DEADLINE: In all three cases, the lead author will be notified within a period of no more than 3 weeks.

Second Stage: Double-Blind Peer Review

 

For article evaluation, Argumentos uses double-blind peer review by expert peers (see Ethics Policy and Good Editorial Practices) and follows the following process:

 

• The article is anonymized: it is copied and pasted into a new document (to remove the original properties and metadata), and the authors' names and affiliations, as well as references to their previous work or self-citations, are removed from this version. Any changes made are noted in the original so that they can be reversed if the manuscript is approved. This anonymized version is sent to two specialists for review along with a form that includes various academic quality criteria (see Review Forms), compliance with which will merit a quantitative score from the reviewer.
• The article is evaluated: 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. Based on both favorable evaluations, the editor decides whether to publish the article. If there is a discrepancy between the two reviewers' evaluations, the editor may choose to seek a third review or, if deemed appropriate, decide to publish or reject it. Occasionally, the timing of publication may be discussed with other members of the editorial board.

Third Stage: Copyediting and Layout

 

The article is sent for copyediting and layout. These processes often involve several consultations with the author regarding details of the text to be published, so their commitment and agile communication are essential. As the final stage of this process, the author will receive a copy of the final layout, ready for publication, for approval or any corrections to visual details. During this step, substantial changes to the text or the addition of new sentences or paragraphs are prohibited.

While under review or editing, manuscripts should not be submitted to any other publication; otherwise, they will be definitively rejected (see Ethics Policy and Good Editorial Practices).

For more information on the format of submitted manuscripts (including maximum word count), see the Instructions for Authors section.

 

DEADLINE: This stage typically takes 7 or 8 weeks and concludes with publication in the journal.