Articles submitted are reviewed by anonymous specialized peers. The reviewers are suggested by the members of the Editorial Committee. When reviews do not concur, the text is sent to another specialist, whose decision will be final. In order to guarantee a fair and impartial review, when imprecise and biased evaluations are received, the Editorial Committee will undertake the review. The author will be informed of the results of the review along with comments, suggestions and notes from the reviewers within four months following receipt of the original document. All review decisions are final. When articles are rejected because the subject matter is not in keeping with the journal’s line of research, the article will not be reviewed by double-blind peers.

When the result of the review is positive and the changes to be made have been indicated, changes to the manuscript will be requested according to the reviewers’ suggestions. The author may challenge the changes or choose to withdraw the article. The new version shall be submitted within two weeks, otherwise the article will be rejected. The corrected text will be sent to one of the original reviewers to confirm that the suggestions were actually incorporated, and to a different expert in the subject to decide if the original document should be accepted for publication. Once the second version has been accepted by the academic peers, further changes cannot be made, except for adaptation to the rules for delivering original documents to the journal.