Peer Review

In Publicaciones en Ciencias y Tecnología  the revision of the manuscripts is carried out in four phases: Reception, Admission, Arbitration and Closing.

1st PHASE- RECEPTION

Carried out by the Editorial Committee, in two steps: In the first place, it is verified if the theme of the manuscript received adjusts to the publication areas of the Journal. In case of not being within these areas, the work is not admitted, and the reasons are communicated to the authors. The journal's publication areas, considering the scientific fields cataloged in the UNESCO International Nomenclature for the fields of Science and Technology, are the following: 11-Logic, 12-Mathematics, 21-Astronomy and Astrophysics, 22-Physics, 23-Chemistry, 25-Earth and Space Sciences and 33-Technological Sciences. Secondly, compliance with the instructions and standards for submitting works is verified. If nonconformities are found, they are communicated to the authors so that they can be addressed.

2nd PHASE- ADMISSION

Carried out by the Editorial Committee: steps: If the previous phase is satisfactorily completed, the manuscript is admitted. At this time the authors are informed of the admission to be evaluated. Subsequently, the Editorial Committee proceeds to appoint at least two (2) evaluators to carry out the arbitration of the work. These evaluators may be part of the teaching and research staff of the Universidad Centroccidental Lisandro Alvarado or be attached to other national and/or international universities or academic/scientific institutions. For this, the Editorial Committee sends the work in blind format and the evaluation form to the evaluators.

3rd PHASE- ARBITRATION

Carried out by peer reviewers (peer review): The accepted manuscript is peer-reviewed by specialists in the subject area of ​​the manuscript. To this end, we request the collaboration of researchers from the institution and external, national or international researchers. The evaluation is carried out under the double-blind modality, in this sense the evaluators do not know the identity of the authors of the writing, and the authors do not know the identity of the evaluators of their work. Science and Technology Publications maintains the confidentiality of the evaluation process. The evaluators review the work considering the criteria of originality, relevance, timeliness, contributions, and scientific rigor. The verdict can be:

  1. Publishable without corrections: The work does not require modifications of form or content for its publication.
  2. Requires minor corrections: The work requires some modifications.
  3. Requires major corrections and review again: The work presents substantive observations that must be addressed by the authors. Subsequently, it must be evaluated again by the referees.
  4. Not Publishable: The work is not publishable. It presents significant observations that would merit redoing the work. The work will not be evaluated again.

PHASE 4- CLOSURE

 Made by the Editorial Committee: In this last phase, the decision to accept or reject the arbitration manuscript is issued. The results of the evaluation of the referees are reviewed by the Editorial Committee. If there is a consensus or majority regarding the verdict of rejection, the authors are informed by sending them a report with the arguments motivating the reasons for the non-publication of the received manuscript. If the verdict refers to observations of improvements, a consolidated report is prepared and said results are communicated to the authors, to be considered in the preparation of the new version of the manuscript. Once the improved version has been received and after reviewing the corrections, the evaluators and the Editorial Committee decide whether to publish it. Finally, we proceed to communicate the acceptance of the work to the authors and issue the corresponding proof of acceptance of publication, in which the Volume and Number in which it will be included is indicated.

In summary, the criteria on which it is decided whether the article is accepted or not, is the following:

  • The theme is consistent with the journal.
    • The manuscript presents an acceptable contribution to knowledge.
    • It has not been previously published or submitted simultaneously to another journal.
    • It is an original work.
    • The methodology and design of the study are consistent with the proposed objective.
    • The results are presented objectively.
    • The conclusions are well founded, derived from the results obtained.
    • It has order, coherence and good writing.
    • References are sufficient, up-to-date and relevant.

CONTROVERSIAL CASES

In case of partial or total non-conformity by the authors regarding the evaluation notified as a result of any of the previous phases, the authors may communicate their arguments supporting them in the aspects in which they present disagreements. The email must be sent by the corresponding author to the email of the journal revistapcyt@ucla.edu.ve with a copy to two members of the Editorial Committee of this journal. This journal is open to receive communications from authors or reviewers and diligently attend to them to provide answers and act accordingly.