Editorial process

Once the manuscript has been received in the journal TecnoLógicas, the author will be notified, informing him that the manuscript will initiate the evaluation process, which will consist of the following phases:

Preliminary evaluation: at this stage the structure of the manuscript and the fulfillment of shipping requirements will be reviewed (listed in the section Submissions). Likewise, strict compliance with the ethics policies and good practices defined by the journal will be verified, in which it is established that the editors will NOT allow breaches of professional ethical codes, such as: plagiarism, double publication, fraudulent use of data and false statements of authorship, among others; this process includes the verification of the originality of the manuscript through a software for the identification of coincidences. In case of identifying indications about infractions of these codes of ethics, the procedure established in the COPE flow diagrams will be followed to resolve cases of suspected bad practices (see here). The estimated time for this process is 48 to 72 hours.

Once this review is completed, the author will be notified about the news and decisions made with his manuscript at this stage. These can be: rejection for non-compliance with the requirements, request for modifications to correct necessary requirements before continuing with the process or continuation with the editorial process. Minor non-conformities will be informed in later stages, so that they are corrected before the publication of the manuscript, in case it is accepted.

Editorial review: the editorial reviewer will critically and constructively analyze the content of the manuscript and determine if it is within the scope and expectations of the journal; It will also inform if its structure and content comply with the rigor, formalism and quality required to be published in the journal TecnoLógicas. Based on this reviewing, the Editorial Committee will determine if the manuscript can continue with the external academic reviewing process. In case the manuscript does not pass the editorial evaluation, the observations will serve the authors to identify opportunities for improvement, in future applications. The maximum estimated time for this process is three weeks.

Academic review by peers: The journal's reviewing policy is scientific arbitration under the double blind modality, in which the identity of the authors and reviewing is unknown to both parties. The manuscript will be sent to at least two academic pairs external to the institution or the country, which are chosen based on criteria of academic solvency in the subject and mastery of the language in which the manuscript is written. They will issue a concept about the academic quality of their content, rigor in the theoretical and methodological treatment as the author's contribution to new knowledge. The cases of controversy will be resolved through the assignment of an additional reviewer and the Editorial Committee will be the one who will determine the final decision of publication. The estimated time for this process is three months, which depends on the speed of the reviewers to respond to the evaluation.

Editorial Decision: according to the report of the reviewers and the additional observations arranged by the Editorial Committee, the author (s) will be informed of the editorial decision on the manuscript, which may be: no acceptance for publication, request for major modifications, request for minor modifications or acceptance for publication. In cases of requests for modification, a maximum date will be established for the reception of the new manuscript. In this case, the author (s) must add a letter in which they report the response to each of the reviewers' recommendations. The strict compliance with the ethics policies and good practices defined by the journal will be verified for the corrected version, this process includes the verification of the originality of the manuscript through a software for the identification of coincidences. This version will be sent to peer reviewers to verify that all required changes have been included in the manuscript. In this second revision, the reviewers can recommend approving or not, the definitive publication of the manuscript or requesting new changes, in which case the new editorial decision will be informed again to the authors. This process is carried out no later than five business days after receiving the concepts of all the reviewers; If the text is returned to the authors to make corrections, they will have a month to make the modifications and submit the manuscript to evaluation again.

Process of text revision and layout: when the manuscript is accepted for publication, it will enter the final editing process. In this stage, the text will be adjusted based on the IEEE international norms and parameters, regarding the citation and referential part. To do this, a file with references in Bibtex format will be requested. Likewise, an orthotypographical, grammatical, semantic and syntactic revision will be made. Then, the article will go to diagramming. The latest version of the article will be reviewed again by the proofreader, the editor and their respective author (s). If corrections do not appear in this process, the author of the contact will be informed of the edition number and approximate date in which the article will be published.

Publication: when the manuscript has completed the diagramming process, it will be published free of charge in electronic format.

NOTE: the time between the initial submission of the manuscript and its final publication depends mainly on the results of each of the evaluations. Therefore, it is suggested to be careful with the fulfillment of the submission requirements and to ensure that your manuscript complies with the quality and technical rigor expected for a scientific publication.