Reviewer Instructions

Magazine presentation 

SCOPE

RISAD adheres to the requirements of uniformity for manuscripts published in CONACYT journals, so the manuscripts must meet the recommendations for authors described in the following link http://revistasinvestigacion.lasalle.mx/index.php/OISAD/about

The Code of Ethics of the "Revista Internacional de Salarios Dignos" follows the ethical standards validated in the "Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors" published by the Committee on Publications Ethics (COPE) and the standards that international ethical committees establish for research.

Implication of the review in RISAD

From RISAD's peer review policy, reviewers should adhere to the following considerations:

  1. They will only accept to review manuscripts from areas of expertise in which they have sufficient  experience
  2. For each manuscript review request to which you are invited to collaborate, you may decide to accept or decline the invitation
  3. If you require more time to conduct the evaluation or are unable to complete it, please inform the editor as soon as possible so that the manuscript can be reassigned
  4. Respect the confidentiality of data throughout the review process
  5. You must declare your potential conflicts of interest
  6. Make an objective evaluation, avoiding that your opinion (political, religious, etc) influences the evaluation process
  7. Comments on your evaluation should be objective and constructive, refrain from being hostile and make denigrating comments
  8. Impersonation during the review process is considered a serious offense
  9. As soon as you are assigned to a review in RISAD, you will become part of the journal's reviewer database, which means that other editors may ask you to review more manuscripts.
  10. You should not accept a review if at the time of the request you are writing an article on the same topic as the one for which the review is requested.
  11. You should not accept the review if you anticipate a conflict of interest.
  12. Due to the journal's editorial policy, you will not be asked to review two manuscripts at a time or within a minimum of 3 months between two reviews.
  13. When you accept the invitation, you will have a maximum period of four weeks to send the evaluation.
  14. During the review process, you will be provided with the manuscript and an evaluation format, as well as the date when the application should be completed
  15. The evaluations are double-blind, so you will not be able to identify the name and affiliation of the authors and they will not know who reviewed your manuscript
  16. Reviewers who agree to evaluate manuscripts for RISAD give their consent for their names and institutions to appear on the journal's website
  17. Reviewers who collaborate in the RISAD evaluation process will receive a certificate for each manuscript evaluated at the time of publication of the issue in which they collaborated.

Conflicts of Interest

You should not agree to review the manuscript if there is a conflict of interest including the following considerations

  1. Previous or recent collaboration with potential authors (if you can identify who wrote it even with the manuscript blinded)
  2. If you are a direct competitor of the subject in question
  3. When you have a situation of dislike or sympathy with the authors (if you can identify who wrote it even with the manuscript blinded)
  4. You can make financial gains from the knowledge gained in this work

If you identify any of these situations, inform your reviewing editor and decline if you feel you cannot provide an objective and impartial review. Otherwise, when submitting your review, notify the editor that you have no conflict of interest.

Confidentiality

When accepting the review, the evaluators must treat all the manuscripts under strict confidentiality and under no circumstances may they share information concerning them with third parties. If the participation of a third person in the evaluation process is considered necessary, the editor should be consulted beforehand and will report on the evaluation issued on the platform.

The correspondence of the review process must also be treated in its entirety with strict confidentiality and through the platform to safeguard the evidence of the process.

The ethics of the reviewers will be called upon at all times to ensure that they do not misuse the information and material in the manuscripts they review prior to publication of the article in RISAD.

Peer and double-blind review

The RISAD review system is double-blind, so that authors and reviewers do not have access to know their identity at any stage of the process. Only the editorial board has access to this information and will handle it in strict confidence.

Important content in the guide:

Include a note to the editor

We ask that you include a brief commentary to the editor about the importance, relevance and quality of the publication for the journal. In this section, please include any comments that you consider relevant and that you wish to send confidentially to the editor.

Comments for authors

Comments to authors should be concrete, objective and constructive. The editors may modify any comment that could be offensive, or even eliminate it if it is unjustified.

Don't forget to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of the revised manuscript. Please consider that the comments you include in this section will be sent to the authors, so please make sure to include them:

  1. Importance and relevance of the topic to the journal and field of knowledge
  2. Adherence to the publication standards established in the international guides of the area.