Peer review policy

All research articles published in the journal are subjected to a rigorous double-blind peer review process based on the initial selection of the editor, the anonymous arbitration of external reviewers of expertise in their particular field and the subsequent revisions of the article’s own author(s) when needed.

The Editorial Team will assign the article to a minimum of two specialists who will review the article and provide recommendations to improve it, as well as give their verdict on the acceptance or rejection of the article. The acceptance or rejection of articles will be communicated to the authors within a period of about four months.. A definitive publication will require the positive evaluation of both. If such is not the case, the article will be subjected to a third evaluation. The result will lead to either the acceptance of the work, the need to introduce corrections to re-evaluate the potential acceptance of the work or to its final rejection. The deadline for authors to make the modifications and corrections recommended by the reviewers is set at 60 days from the communication by the editors

The double-blind peer review process ensures that the assigned reviewers have no knowledge about the identity of the author, just as authors have no knowledge about who is reviewing their work. Notwithstanding, journals are encouraged to publish the list of external reviewers that have collaborated with it the preceding years.

Evaluation process:

The manuscripts received by Didáctica. Lengua y Literatura undergo the following evaluation process:

1) Anti-plagiarism detection through the Turnitin software.
2) Pre-evaluation. The manuscripts received by the journal are subject to an initial review by the Editorial Board. The aim of that pre-evaluation is to make certain that the works received match the scope of the journal, comply with the style and citation guidelines, and have enough quality to move on to the double-blind peer review process.
3) Double-blind peer review process. In this stage, the articles will be sent to two independent expert reviewers, who will complete this template to assess the scientific quality of the paper.

Evaluation guidelines:

All reviewers must follow the following ethical principles:

  • They must only accept to review manuscripts about subjects in which they are sufficiently experienced, pledging to complete the revision in the accorded period.
  • They must be as objective and constructive in their review as possible, refraining from making personal comments that may be defamatory or insulting.
  • They must indicate any potential conflict of interest, including any type of relationship with the author(s) that may bias their assessment.
  • They must judge the author(s) by their merits, regardless of ethnicity, religion, nationality, sex, seniority or institutional affiliation.
  • They must be confidential concerning the peer review process.
  • They must provide a review report constructive, thorough, verified and adequately substantial.
  • They must notify the journal’s editor concerning similarities between the article in consideration and any published work or manuscript sent for consideration known to them.

External reviews will make their evaluation through the Open Journal System platform and will base on this template designed by the Editorial Committee of Didáctica. Lengua y Literatura. As a result of reading the article, they will select one of the following options in the final recommendation section:

A) Accept this submission. The reviewers will select this option if the article can be published as such or with the minor formal modifications that are specified in “comments”.

B) Publicable con modificaciones. Se seleccionará esta casilla si el texto requiere modificaciones y/o mejoras menores que se especifican en "comentarios" o en documento adjunto.

C) Resubmit for review. It will be selected if the work could be published only after making the major modifications and/or content or form revisions that are specified in “comments” or in the attached file.

D) Not publishable. In the case of marking this option, the reviewers will also include the pertinent arguments in “comments”.

The Editorial Board, taking into consideration the reports of the external reviewers, will decide whether to finally publish or reject an article and will always notify their decision to its author(s).