Peer Review Process

The works received for the didactic research sections (until 2024), monographic, and miscellaneous (from 2025) will be reviewed by a minimum of two external reviewers, who will always be individuals of recognized prestige in the topic addressed by the manuscripts.

It will be taken into account that the reviewers do not belong to the University to which the author belongs, have supervised their doctoral thesis, or are members of the same research group or project.

Publications in the other sections have not been and are not subject to review by external reviewers.

The review system will be double-blind, meaning that the identity of both authors and reviewers is unknown to each side.

The reviewers, adhering to what is specified in the Guide for Evaluators, will issue a report by filling out the Evaluation Form.

The selection of reviewers is the responsibility of the journal's Editors, who take into account their academic, scientific, and professional experience, including specialists from both national and international origins. Members of the Advisory Committee may be among the reviewers.

Editorial process stages

All works sent to the Journal's Editorial Office will be acknowledged within a maximum of 5 days.

All articles sent will undergo a double evaluation:

• Internal or preliminary evaluation, where the group of Editors will check adherence to style norms; determine if its content fits within the thematic line of the ECCSS journal; and provide opinions on its content. At this point, the author will be suggested to make any changes before starting the external evaluation phase. The Editors will have 15 days to provide this report.
• External evaluation or peer review (double-blind system): once it is established that the manuscript meets the formal and thematic requirements, it will be sent to a minimum of two peers, who, adhering to what is specified in the Guide for Evaluators, will issue a report by filling out the evaluation Form. In case of conflicting opinions and/or if deemed appropriate, a third opinion will be requested. The given timeframe for this evaluation by external reviewers will be 30 days.

If the text is rejected, the result will be communicated to the author along with the corresponding evaluations. If the text is accepted or requires changes, it will be communicated to the author along with the evaluations, having 15 natural days in each evaluation phase to send the revised text. The author must also send a detailed report of the changes made in the manuscript, adhering to the suggestions of the associate editors and peers, if the opinion is subject to modifications.

Once the text is accepted, a final version of it in PDF format will be sent to the authors, and they will have 5 days to review it. Thus, authors can send a report of the specific changes to be made that will primarily address the format and possible typographical errors.

Once the editorial process is completed, the texts will be stored, deciding the final order at the closure of the corresponding issue.

Criteria for the acceptance of works

The factors on which the decision on the acceptance-rejection of works by the journal's editors is based are as follows:

1. The originality, novelty, and relevance of the research conducted are assessed together, in addition to the interest for the Didactics of Social Sciences.
2. Significance of the research for scientific and social advancement.
3. Reliability and scientific validity of both the sources consulted, and the methods used for the development of the research.
4. Adequate writing, logical organization, and material presentation of the manuscript.