Once the authors upload the article on the platform, the Editorial Committee verifies compliance with the criteria requested in the evaluation form. If the work does not meet the criteria, we proceed to write to the author (a) to make modifications to their submission. If the email is not answered by the author within a considered time, the sending is declined. On the other hand, if it meets the criteria of the Journal, the editorial committee proceeds to send the manuscript to peer reviewers with the principle that both the name of the reviewer and the authors remain in anonymity (double blind).

The Psicumex Journal has two review rounds, the first is used to establish an opinion on the article and the second to check if the recommendations that were suggested were considered. There is a pre-established form to carry out the reviews of the Journal. A maximum of two weeks is established for the reviewers to respond if they agree to review the writing and have approximately six weeks to evaluate the writing and make a decision. The provisions that the reviewers could take are:

I recommend its publication with 2 alternatives (Publishable as presented, Publishable, but requires minor formal corrections).

I recommend its publication subject to modifications with six options (Requires reworking the introduction, Requires reworking the theoretical framework, Requires reworking the method, Requires reworking the results, Requires reworking the discussion, Requires reworking the conclusions, Requires some other important modification).

I do not recommend its publication with four explanations about the decision and an additional one for the reviewer to write why it cannot be accepted (It does not answer important questions to solve human problems, It does not fall within the objectives of the Journal, It presents deficiencies theoretical and / or methodological that would require a new job, Presents serious ethical deficiencies, Other).

For an article to be publishable, both reviewers must have an approving verdict. If there is no agreement between the reviewers, the evaluation of a third reviewer is requested to have two opinions in the same sense. Once an agreement is reached in two revisions, it is sent to the author and the modifications are requested in case they are needed. Once the article with the modifications is received, it it goes through a second round of evaluation, if its publication is approved, the article is sent to the editing process.