The editor will send each article to two reviewers, specialists in the journal's disciplines, anonymously and externally. Their purpose will be to review and weigh the scientific merits and originality.

The evaluation process will be carried out according to an evaluation guideline that includes the following items: 1) adherence to the instructions for authors and 2) content indicators.

Regarding point 1, the presence of titles, keywords, and abstracts in Spanish and English, adherence to APA 7th edition standards, and length will be evaluated. For each item, there will be a compliance indicator, in the following terms: non-compliance; partial compliance, and full-compliance. If a manuscript fails to meet any of these requirements, it will be desk rejected. If the manuscript receives two "partial compliance" ratings, it should be rejected.

Regarding point 2, the following items will be evaluated: 1) if the manuscript has not been published or publicly disclosed in a print or digital medium); 2) originality of the article (i.e., it is not a copy of other external writings, articles, or books, but is an original creation); 3) the current state of the field and contribution to the discipline; and 4) working hypothesis and coherence of development. For each of these items, there will be an evaluation in the following terms: very good, good, fair, poor.

If the article receives an average rating of "good" on content indicators and the reviewer suggests acceptance, but it has problems with compliance with the authors' guidelines, then, it should be accepted with comments. If the article does not fully meet the originality indicator, the article must be rejected, stating the reasons for this decision in the observations or comments to the editor. If the article does not comply with the authors' guidelines, and in addition, the reviewer proposes substantive improvements, it cannot be accepted with comments, and, consequently, must be rejected. If the article receives a "fair" rating on two content items, it must be rejected. Similarly, if the article receives a "poor" rating on any of the content items, it must be rejected.