Revista Movimiento Científico has an Editorial/Scientific Committee and a clear, pedagogical, and rigorous arbitration process for all documents proposed for possible publication in the journal.
In order to achieve greater visibility and dissemination, Revista Movimiento Científico is available at the following electronic address: http://revmovimientocientifico.ibero.edu.co. In the interest of guaranteeing the quality of published articles, the journal fulfills a selection process carried out by the Editor, the Editorial/Scientific Committee, and expert peer reviewers (internal and external arbitration); likewise, articles must conform to grammatical rules, employing scientific and technical terminology appropriately.
The evaluation process (arbitration) for each article proposed for publication in the journal consists of the following phases:
Selection criteria are applied according to scientific rigor, originality, methodological coherence, currency, and potential impact, and compliance with the formal requirements of Revista Movimiento Científico is verified. From this phase onward, initial comments on the document are made and sent to the authors for corrections.
Duration: 2 weeks.
Following the immediately preceding process, once the adjustments required by the Editor have been made, the author or authors must submit the corrected version of the article.
Duration: 2 weeks from the date of receipt of the document for correction.
This process guarantees the quality, originality, and relevance of articles through a double-blind arbitration process. This phase includes:
Search for peer reviewers
Submission of invitation requests to peer reviewers
Acceptance of the review
Receipt of the evaluation issued by the peer reviewer (Annex 1: Article Review Form)
Duration: 6 weeks.
The evaluation results are sent together with all comments made on the article in the previous step, and once the required adjustments have been made, the author or authors must submit the final version of their article.
Duration: 2 to 4 weeks; these timeframes are assigned depending on whether the corrections are major or minor.
Based on the evaluations issued by the reviewers, the experts may reach one of the following decisions:
Accepted with minor revisions
Accepted with major revisions
Rejected
Accepted
The results and observations derived from the evaluation process will be communicated to the authors through the OJS platform.
When there are significant discrepancies between the evaluators' assessments, the Editorial Committee may designate a third academic peer reviewer to support the final editorial decision.
Once an ACCEPTANCE response for publication has been issued, the final layout process will proceed and will be reviewed by the author; the official publication of the manuscript in the corresponding volume will then take place.
The Editorial Committee may reject manuscripts before or during the evaluation process when they:
Do not correspond to the thematic scope or editorial line of the journal
Present significant methodological, argumentative, or academic deficiencies
Fail to comply with the journal's editorial and ethical policies
Evidence problems of scientific integrity, plagiarism, duplication, or improper use of sources
Authors who disagree with an editorial decision may submit a formal appeal addressed to the Editor-in-Chief, setting out the grounds for their request in a reasoned manner. The Editorial Committee will comprehensively analyze the case and issue a final decision. The maximum response time for resolving an appeal will be 15 business days from the date of receipt.
