All manuscripts must be submitted through the Open Journal System (OJS), which guarantees the electronic and auditable interaction interactions between the publication and the authors. Once set, the Board of Editors checks that the originals comply with the purpose and scope of the publication, as well as with the authors' guidelines.

The texts that pass this first sieve, continue with the editorial process. All manuscripts are reviewed by the "double-blind peer-review" arbitration system, the experts of the subject do not belong to the institution of the authors. This process guarantees the anonymity of the documents, authors and reviewers, certifying the transparency, objectivity and impartiality of the review process. The review report and evaluationis used by the external reviewers can be consulted here for studies (critical review of the literature, reports ...) and here for empirical research.

The process of complete revision, from the moment of the deposit of the manuscripts through the OJS until the completion of the reviews takes an average time of 8-10 weeks, except incidents. Reviewers, in turn, must also comply with reviewers'guidelines and the code of ethics.

Once the opinions of the external reviewers have been obtained, the decision may be:

• Accepted: In which case the mock-up and publication of the article will be carried out for the next issue.
• Accepted with minor changes: The authors will be notified of the changes proposed by the reviewers, sending them the completed revision protocol   (model for research). In this case the reviewers will have a maximum of 7 continuous days to send the manuscript with the changes requested.
• Accepted with major changes: Authors will be notified of changes proposed by reviewers, remitting the completed revision protocol  (model for research). In this case the reviewers will have a maximum of 7 continuous days to send the manuscript with the changes requested.
• Rejected: In which case the authors will be informed in a motivated manner, explaining the reasons for rejection and the protocol of revision completed (model for research). Authors may always exercise their right to a written complaint to the Journal's Board of Editors.

In case there is a disparity between the opinions of the reviewers, a third reviewer will be delegated to resolve the divergence.