Submission of Manuscripts

All manuscripts must be submitted through the Open Journal Systems 3 (OJS3) platform in the required format. The Editorial Team of La Barca de Teseo will be responsible for receiving and processing the manuscripts. Manuscripts must be original and unpublished and not be submitted simultaneously for evaluation to another journal.

Evaluation Process

Manuscripts are evaluated through a double-blind peer review process. Reviewers are selected by the Editorial Team and are experts in the thematic area of the work. Evaluation criteria include originality, contributions to knowledge, academic rigor, and structural coherence. Confidentiality and anonymity between authors and reviewers are guaranteed throughout the process.

Ethics in Publishing and Evaluation

La Barca de Teseo follows strict ethical guidelines in all phases of publishing and evaluation. This includes the prevention of plagiarism, the identification of conflicts of interest, and the guarantee of a fair and impartial review process.

Article Evaluation Process

Initial Review

Received manuscripts undergo an initial formal review to verify their compliance with the journal's requirements. If a manuscript does not meet the minimum criteria, the Editorial Board may decide not to send it to the peer review process.

Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass the initial review are subject to double-blind peer review, with a minimum of two external reviewers from the editorial team. In the event of disagreement between reviewers, the editorial team assumes the task of deliberating and making the final decision on whether or not to publish the manuscript. The average response time is two months.

Evaluation Criteria

Manuscripts are evaluated according to the following criteria:

• Originality and Relevance: The work must offer an original and relevant contribution to the field of study.
• Clarity and Structural Coherence: The manuscript must be well-organized and present arguments in a clear and coherent way.
• Academic Rigor: A solid theoretical and methodological foundation is expected.
• Relevance and Currency of Sources: Cited sources must be current and relevant to the research topic.

Verdict

Reviewers issue one of the following verdicts:

• Accept submission.
• Publishable with modifications.
• Not publishable.

Authors have a maximum of 15 days to respond to the observations, which may be extended depending on the proximity of the publication date of the next issue of La Barca de Teseo.

Appeals and Complaints

Authors have the right to appeal editorial decisions or file ethical complaints. These must be submitted in writing to the Director or Editor of the journal through the same platform through which submissions are made.

Deadlines

• Initial review: up to 2 weeks.
• Submission to reviewers: up to 1 month.
• Response of acceptance or rejection: up to 2 months from the initial review.

Explanation of Terms

• Originality: The manuscript must offer a new and innovative contribution to the field of study.
• Relevance: The manuscript must be of interest to the readership of the journal.
• Clarity: The manuscript must be well-written and easy to understand.
• Coherence: The manuscript must present a logical and consistent argument.
• Academic rigor: The manuscript must be based on sound theoretical and methodological foundations.
• Relevance and currency of sources: The sources cited in the manuscript must be relevant to the research topic and up-to-date.
• Verdict: The decision of the reviewers on whether or not to publish the manuscript.
• Appeal: A request by the author to reconsider the decision of the reviewers.
• Complaint: A complaint by the author about an ethical violation in the publication process.

Retractions

1. Identification of the Problem: Any reader, author, or member of the editorial team may identify an ethical problem or significant error in a published article. The person must report it to the Director or Editor-in-Chief within 15 days.
2. Preliminary Evaluation: The Director or Editor-in-Chief will evaluate the severity of the reported problem or error within 7 days. Other members of the editorial team and/or experts in the field may be consulted if necessary.
3. Communication with the Authors: The authors of the article in question will be contacted within 7 days to request clarification or a response.
4. Formal Investigation: If the authors' response is not satisfactory or the problem is serious, a formal investigation will be initiated. This may include peer review and consultation with external experts. All documentation related to the process will be securely archived.
5. Decision and Action: Depending on the results of the investigation, a decision will be made on whether to retract the article. If the decision is to retract, a retraction note will be published explaining the reasons and linking to the original article.
6. Notification and Database Updates: The authors, reviewers, and, if applicable, the authors' affiliated institution will be notified. Relevant academic databases will be updated to reflect the retraction.
7. Appeals: The authors will have 15 days to appeal the retraction decision.
8. External Review: In particularly sensitive or complex cases, an external review of the investigation and decision process may be conducted.
9. Follow-up: A follow-up will be implemented to ensure that the retraction has been carried out effectively.

Corrections

1. Identification of the Error: Minor errors that do not affect the integrity of the article, such as typographical or formatting errors, may be corrected without the need for a formal process.
2. Request for Correction: The authors or any member of the editorial team may request a correction within 7 days.
3. Evaluation and Approval: The Director or Editor-in-Chief will evaluate the request and determine if the correction is necessary and appropriate within 7 days.
4. Publication of the Correction and Database Updates: If approved, a correction will be published that links to the original article. Relevant academic databases will be updated to reflect the correction.
5. Notification and Follow-up: The authors and reviewers will be notified of the correction, and a follow-up will be implemented to ensure that the correction has been carried out effectively.
6. Periodic Review of the Procedure: This procedure will be reviewed periodically to ensure that it remains effective and relevant.

Explanation of Key Points

• Retractions are reserved for serious errors or ethical problems that undermine the integrity of the article. These may include plagiarism, data falsification, or other forms of misconduct.
• Corrections are used to address minor errors that do not affect the integrity of the article. These may include typographical or formatting errors, or errors in the interpretation of data.
• The process for retractions and corrections is designed to be fair and transparent. Authors have the opportunity to respond to allegations of misconduct, and the decision to retract or correct an article is made by the editorial team after careful consideration of all the evidence.

Additional Information

La Barca de Teseo is committed to the highest standards of academic integrity. The retraction and correction procedure is designed to ensure that the integrity of the journal is maintained and that readers can have confidence in the accuracy and reliability of the published articles.