Peer Review

The Editorial Board of JLA Ediciones through the OJS system of YUYAY will acknowledge receipt of the originals uploaded to the system or sent by e-mail in accordance with the issue coordination guidelines.  After receiving a manuscript, the Editorial Board carries out a pre-assessment of relevance. It verifies whether the document has not been published before and the percentages of similarity of the content through the matching analysis software used by the journal. Formatting and editing must be adjusted in accordance with the Guidelines for Authors.

In case of obtaining a negative criterion in the previous points, the corresponding author receives a review report (see guide format) specifying the formal and content aspects that need to be improved in order to advance to the next phase of the evaluation process. The Editorial Board may reject an article, without the need to proceed with its evaluation, when it is considered that it does not conform to the publication guidelines, journal profile or absence of the mandatory metadata (see checklist and guidelines for author(s).

All contributions to the journal are subject to match control. Articles and essays are sent directly to peers if they pass the first filter. In the case of "creative work and/or product" and "multidisciplinary analysis and discourses" (the types of work that are included in this methodology are detailed in the Focus and Scope section), the issue coordinators will review their relevance and make suggestions for submission to peers in the journal's database, allied institutions or referred by the issue coordinator. Only in the aforementioned cases, the processing from acceptance to the "double anonymous peer review" could be shorter than the declared time (16 weeks). In this process, it is examined whether the document meets the necessary scientific qualities to be published and/or disseminated, considering the subject matter of the issue and adjustments declared by the coordinator.

The management of the journal will ensure the confidentiality of the process, by keeping the identity of the author(s) and the referees confidential. All articles are subject to a formative evaluation between two (2) and three (3) experts in the field. All articles are evaluated under the principle of anonymity of the reviewer. Similarly, the authors do not know the identity of the evaluators. For this process, the Editorial Board carries out a rigorous and careful procedure of coding articles, as well as safeguarding the identity of the reviewers; The refereeing certificates received by the reviewer include the code of the article being evaluated, avoiding the appearance of the title and author of the reviewed article.

The responsibility for the systematization of the content review process and the continuity of the journal's publication lies with the Editorial Board in the figure of its Director and Technical Editor.

Review, evaluation, or review plays a critical role in scholarly publishing; it helps to validate research, establish a method by which it can be evaluated, and increase the chances of networking within research communities.

JLA Ediciones and YUYAY give importance to the process, not only on the side of the research, but also on the side of the reviewer. That is why we have established quality and transparency parameters, while acknowledging the work of the professionals who support us in this important task.

To know the elements that must be taken into account to review or evaluate a manuscript, we suggest that you download one of our review forms from this link.

For the evaluation of the articles of each compendium, a double refereeing system is used (following the COPE recommendations):

1. Anonymous double peer review

Authors are obliged, for each of the materials submitted, to undergo a peer review process and to follow the publication rules.

Its specific objectives are to disseminate:

- unpublished articles that are the result of research advances (peer review);
- interviews (peer review structured in special issues);
- miscellaneous (peer review structured in special issues);
- scientific, artistic and/or cultural essays (peer review);
- work and/or creative product (peer review specialized by call);
- multidisciplinary analysis and discourses (peer review);

How are manuscripts submitted to YUYAY processed?

• Once the author uploads the article, the GENERAL EDITOR will submit it to a review to verify that it meets the minimum conditions necessary to be processed and CONVENE THE EDITORIAL BOARD. The general editor will assign a SECTION EDITOR to continue the process.
• The articles that are sent for review must appear without the name of the author, title, company or institution from which it comes, in case of being sent with this data, a copy of the document will be created without this data and observations will be added in the process prior to the beginning of the double-blind peer review process that allows the impartiality and objectivity of the entire publication process.
• YUYAY employs the double-blind review method. This means that the author does not know the identity of his reviewers and the reviewer will not be informed of the identity of the authors or their affiliations. The reviewer is not required to sign off on their reviews. Reviews will be stored in the OJS system for traceability and use by the editor-in-chief and editors. Feedback for authors comes solely and exclusively from the editor-in-chief or editors, but there are cases where reviewers will add information or edits for consideration. Details of these reviews will be included for the sake of investigative transparency.
• The reviewers will be chosen from the database of the journal itself, allied institutions and when necessary, external specialists may be contacted who are suggested or recommended by the issue coordinator for this process, for this the manuscript review format will be sent, the recommended reviewers will be included in the OJS database and their opinion will be incorporated into the basis for submission to the corresponding author. They will receive a review form so that they can be guided through the evaluation process.
• The reviewers will also not have contact with each other; Its work is coordinated by the Section Editors and by the General Editor.
• Once the evaluation is concluded, the reviewers must make a judgment within the following categories: PUBLISHABLE, NOT PUBLISHABLE, PUBLISHABLE WITH EDITING.
• The section editor will receive the verdicts of the reviewers, and if necessary may seek another opinion. To do this, we will proceed in the same way as described above.
• The section editor will be in charge of sending the author the final decision on their collaboration, detailing the reasons why the decision was made.
• If the article is publishable with editing, the suggestions that the reviewers make to the article will be sent to you. If the author accepts the suggestions made, he/she must return the corrected article within the time allotted to him/her.
• The new version is compared with the original and it is evaluated whether to continue with the editing process or not.

How long should the review take?

YUYAY aims to ensure that the entire processing time of a manuscript – from submission to publication – is a maximum of 12 - 14 weeks. This commits us to ensuring a quality and agile review, so that the authors and institutions we work with see the results of their efforts.

As indicated in previous paragraphs, this time will only vary when the number coordinator provides external reviewers who issue their acceptance judgment within the context of the call for issues. This process will be called a fast-track review system, the review should not take more than 20 days.

Encouraging Reviewers

Considering that a reviewer with experience in first world journals invests more or less two and a half hours in making a complete evaluation of a work and, in addition, aware of the need and importance of evaluation in research, JLA Ediciones through ARTSCOLLECTIVE JLA S.A.S. as stated in the Financing section and encourages those professionals who have officiated as reviewers.

This stimulus is offered in the following forms:

• Delivery of an official certificate by the General Editor of our journal.
• Registration of talks and/or congresses

Evaluation of reviewers

In our journal we use the Open Journal System, through which we can also evaluate the work of the reviewers. Reviewers have access to enter comments by item and also to upload corrections if deemed necessary. YUYAY will take into account that:

• The reviewer has identified strengths and weaknesses of the study design and methodology.
• The reviewer has commented on the author's interpretation of the data.
• The reviewer comments on the strengths and weaknesses of the text in its quality of written communication, independent of methodological aspects.
• The reviewer has suggested possible improvements to the manuscript.
• The reviewer's comments are constructive and professional (even if they are not seen by the author).
• The editor receives a contribution of context and perspective to be able to make the best decision regarding acceptance or rejection of the work.

Reiterative Funding Note:

The journal YUYAY: Strategies, Methodologies & Educational Didactics is financed with contributions made by ARTSCOLLECTIVE JLA S.A.S as a private entity. Its financing system conforms to the parameters of free commercialization and monitored by the Superintendence of Companies, Securities and Insurance (more information here), in addition to other sources of sponsorship and financing supported in the development of Social Sustainability projects in accordance with the Organic Law for Economic Development and Fiscal Sustainability after theCOVID-19  Pandemic and of sponsoring companies in detail of the AGREEMENT No. MCYP-MCYP-2022-0025-A for individuals, companies and/or culturally based organizations

Updated July 09, 2024.
Resolution JLA-ED-REV-YUYAY-2024-016

Version History:
March 21, 2023 - Resolution JLA-ED-REV-YUYAY-2023-011

March 25, 2024. Resolution JLA-ED-REV-YUYAY-2024-008