Peer-Review Policy

Manuscripts submitted to Foro Internacional are subject to the following rules and peer-review procedures:

  1. Submissions will be first considered by the Editor-in-Chief and Editorial Board, who reserve the right to reject manuscripts in a pre-review stage (desk rejection) if they are not fundamentally based on academic research, fail to meet minimum quality standards, or fall outside the scope of the journal. Manuscripts that fail to adhere strictly to the journal's Ethical and Good Practices Guidelines will also be desk rejected. Desk rejection requires the agreement of at least two editors, who will review manuscripts without knowing the identity of the authors.

  2. All other article submissions will be subject to academic peer-review by at least two specialists in the field. Reviewers for submitted articles must have recognized academic expertise in the relevant field of study and be affiliated with an academic institution, either national or international.

  3. The identity of the reviewers will remain anonymous to the author(s), and vice versa. Foro Internacional strictly adheres to such a double-blind review process.

  4. The reviewers will submit a written evaluation of the manuscript's scientific quality, considering factors such as coherence, originality, substance, methodological rigor, contribution to the field, and appropriate and specialized use of the existing academic literature.

  5. Reviewers are asked to submit their evaluation of the manuscript within one month of receiving an invitation to review. They should indicate whether the manuscript requires major or minor modifications and whether they consider them to be mandatory or optional. The reviewers will make one of the following recommendations to the editors regarding publication of the manuscript: "not publishable," "publishable with major modifications" (revise and resubmit), "publishable with minor modifications" (conditional acceptance), or "publishable without modifications."

  6. After receiving the reviews, the editorial team will make a decision regarding publication and communicate it to the authors in a timely manner. The journal aims to reach a decision within three months from the submission of the manuscript, whenever possible. The reviewers' comments will be shared with the authors while ensuring anonimity. 

  7. Only articles that receive two favorable peer reviews are eligible for publication. If the manuscript fails to do so, the editorial team will inform the authors of the negative outcome and share the reviews with them. If only one of the two initial reviews is favorable ("publishable with minor modifications" or "publishable without modifications"), the Editor-in-Chief and Editorial Board may request a third review to reach a decision.

  8. If the reviewers deem the manuscript to be publishable with minor or major modifications, the author(s) will be invited to submit a revised version within six months at the latest. The revised manuscript must be accompanied by a memo detailing how the authors addressed the comments and recommendations raised during the review process.

  9. Manuscripts that were evaluated as "publishable with major modifications" (revise and resubmit) will be sent back to reviewers, who will assess the revised version and make a new recommendation to the editors regarding publication. If the revised manuscript was previously evaluated as "publishable with minor modifications," the journal's editorial team will assess the revisions to determine whether they are sufficient for publication.