Guidelines for Reviewers

USE OF THE JOURNAL PLATFORM

If you have any questions about using the platform during the review process, please consult our OJS Manual for Reviewers.

ACCEPTANCE/REJECTION CRITERIA FOR MANUSCRIPT EVALUATION

The journal Cuestiones de Género selects the most qualified reviewers to conduct an evaluation appropriate to the manuscript's topic. However, reviewers must consider the following criteria before accepting a submission:

Academic knowledge and experience: the reviewer must be an expert in the specific topic of the manuscript.

Time availability: A thorough and effective review requires time, within the established deadlines for submitting the evaluation report (30 days).

Conflict of interest: The invitation must be declined if any of the following circumstances apply: identification of the person(s) who wrote the text; excessive academic or personal closeness to them; Membership of the same University, Department, Research Group, Thematic Network, or Research Project; joint publication; or any other relationship that implies a connection with the person(s) who wrote the article. Conflicts of interest may arise due to either proximity or animosity.

Confidentiality commitment: The reviewer must maintain the confidentiality of the article's content throughout the process, and disclosure of any element of the article to third parties is prohibited. If an expert opinion on the article is required, authorization must be requested from the Editorial Board.

THE REVIEWR'S ROLE

The external reviewer must critically and constructively analyze the content of the manuscript in order to offer an objective and scientific assessment that allows the Editorial Board to make a decision on the manuscript's suitability for possible publication in the journal Cuestiones de Género.

The work must be of high scientific quality, in accordance with the criteria indicated in section 3 (General evaluation criteria), in order to guarantee the impact of the manuscript in its area of ​​knowledge and maintain the publication's high standards.

GENERAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

The assessments on the review form, as well as the comments and notes included in the manuscript or in an attached file, must be constructive and respectful and not contain any personal data. Please note that the reports will be sent to the authors, so they must be clear and allow for improvements to the article's content or provide reasoned justification for the reasons for a possible rejection. Likewise, they must facilitate the Editorial Board's final decision on the suitability and appropriateness of publishing the manuscript.

Reviewers must submit, through the OJS platform, a report that must be justified in the literature on the subject matter covered, indicating at the end whether the article is appropriate or not. The evaluation must be reasoned, based on the comments that justify each of the criteria analyzed. During the review process, the following aspects must be assessed:

Title, abstract, and keywords (clarity and structure): These must describe the content of the article.

Relevance of the topic and originality of the work: The topic of the article must be of profound interest to the scientific community. Manuscripts must be original. To this end, the external reviewer must ask themselves the following questions:

Is the article sufficiently novel and interesting to justify publication?

Does it contribute anything to the knowledge of the area of ​​study?

Is the research question relevant?

To answer these questions, you can consult the current literature on the topic on Web of Knowledge, Scopus, or Google Scholar, and indicate in your assessment the manuscript's relationship to the latest publications on the topic.

Literature review: This review must present a summary of the state of the art on the article's topic from an international perspective, clearly stating the studies that are questioned or sought to be corroborated. The objective of the article and its methodological design must be clear.

Structure and organization of the article: Manuscripts must adhere to the structure established in the journal's publication guidelines. Their structure must include the following duly numbered sections: introduction, objectives, methodology, results, and conclusions.

Argumentative capacity: The manuscript must demonstrate a correct thematic progression, allowing the reader to clearly understand the text's objectives as they read.

Writing: Special attention must be paid to academic language, notifying the Editorial Board, if necessary, of any aspects that make the article difficult to read (excessive clauses and subordinate clauses, use of terminology inappropriate to the subject matter, grammatical errors, etc.). Cuestiones de Género recommends the use of gender-neutral and inclusive language in texts submitted for publication.

Objectives: The research objectives must be clearly specified.

Methodological rigor: The text must be clear and well-founded. Its description must include a detailed description of the process followed during the research.

Research instruments: The research instruments must have been validated and allow the study to be replicated.

Research results: should clearly explain the findings obtained in a sequential and logical manner. In research involving the participation of the population (including children, youth, or adults), the relevance of incorporating sex or gender as an analytical variable will be considered, and whether this has influenced the results will be established. Therefore, the results are expected to mention differences between the sexes or those due to gender relations, or, conversely, the absence of differences.

Progress and Discussion: This section should allow for an interpretation of the data in light of the existing literature on the topic presented in the literature review. Justification should be given for whether they contradict or corroborate the results of other research.

Conclusions: The findings should be presented in a comprehensive manner, without reiterating aspects already addressed in the Results and Discussion sections.

Citations: The variety and richness of citations should justify and consolidate the thematic progression of the article.

References: The relevance of the references used should be verified, as well as their use in the body of the article. The work should not contain references that are not cited in the text.

ETHICAL ISSUES

 A) Plagiarism

If the reviewer suspects that the article may contain plagiarism, they must inform the Editorial Board of this circumstance, providing supporting documentation.

B) Fraud

The Editorial Board must be informed if there is any suspicion that the results or content of a manuscript are false or fraudulent.

C) Conflict of Interest

The journal encourages reviewers to disclose any conflicts of interest upon receiving the manuscript for evaluation.

Reviewers must declare any conflicts of interest that may influence the task assigned to them. The journal reserves the right to unassign the corresponding review based on this information. For its part, the Editorial Committee of Cuestiones de Género is committed to making decisions that promote the absence of conflicts of interest in all phases of the editorial process.

D) Regarding the use of AI by reviewers

If reviewers use AI to assist in the evaluation of a manuscript, they must declare this use. AI can serve as a support, but critical judgment and final evaluation must be performed by humans.

AI should not replace the reviewers' responsibility in scientific evaluation. The process should be carried out primarily by humans, and the use of AI should be complementary.

OTHER GUIDELINES FOR REVIEW

 After reading the article, reviewers should complete the Evaluation Report by filling in the boxes and noting their guidance and suggestions. It is suggested that comments and requested changes be included in the "Other Requested Changes" section of the Evaluation Report.

Reviewers can complete the review form online (available on the platform) or complete the Word report (request it if you wish) and upload it to the platform or send it to our email.

If you wish, you may make notes on the article's corpus. In this case, we ask that you do so in a color of your choice, so we can distinguish it, and that you subsequently upload it to the platform or send it to us at dleoz@unileon.es.

If you use Word's "Track Changes" to perform the annotated review, please change your name to initials so that when the authors receive the document, they won't know your identity, as the review must be blind.

To change your username in Word, follow these instructions:

  • Click File > Options.
  • In the Options dialog box, change your username and initials in the "Personalize Your Copy of Microsoft Office" section, and then click "OK."

If you're using a Mac, follow these instructions:

  • Click Word > Preferences > User Info.
  • In the User Info dialog box, change your name and initials in the "Name" field, and then close the window.

If you encounter any problems using Track Changes, simply highlighting changes to the article with a color in the text is sufficient.