Once the receipt of the text is confirmed, it is submitted to a plagiarism test with the Ithenticate tool, then a pre-selection is made by the coordinators of the journal to determine its thematic relevance. Once the work is qualified as pertinent for publication, it will be submitted to double-blind review; in the case of research articles, documentary analysis and works, they will be judged by two specialists in the subject under the same review system; the profiles and reviews will be submitted to a single reviewer.

Manuscripts are submitted to the double-blind academic peer review process. This form consists of two or more reviewers externals reading and analyzing the manuscripts, issuing the respective opinion (accepted, accepted with minor observations, accepted with major observations or rejection) according to a format and justifying each of their assessments. When the opinion made by the reviewers is controversial, the responsible editor will review the manuscript and the observations made by the reviewers to decide on the case. Depending on the situation, the editor can accept, reject or continue with the review process.

If the writing corresponds to a subject of the journal and meets the requirements described in the guide for authors, the letter of receipt of the contribution will be issued with a reference key. This code must be included in any communication of procedure or consultation. Failure to comply with the criteria described in the guide will lead to the return of the manuscript for correction before being involved in the review process. If the contribution meets the criteria to proceed with the review process, the Editor-in-Chief will assign the contribution to an Associate Editor selected to coordinate the review process. The Associate Editor will assign the contribution to a pair of experts in the field to review the manuscript. This process is a double-blind review. The qualification assigned by the reviewers, can be: accepted, minor revision, major revision or rejection.