Peer Review
The articles published by estrema are subjected to a double-blind peer review process, always conducted by researchers with a Ph.D.
The Editorial Team is committed to ensuring the anonymity of articles in the review process, removing any authorship identification from the file using appropriate tools, namely those provided by Microsoft Word and MicrosoftOS .
Reviewers use a form provided by the Team to report their evaluation and present their recommendation regarding the publication of the articles. This recommendation can be categorised as follows: accepted, accepted pending modifications, or rejected. In that same form, reviewers provide their rationale for the recommendation and declare the absence of conflicts of interest. If deemed relevant, reviewers may also provide suggestions in the body of the text, as long as they are anonymised.
All reviewers will be identified in the copyright page of each issue.
The evaluation of submitted articles considers the following parameters, according to the form provided:
- Article suitability to the theme of the issue;
- Originality and relevance;
- Scientific rigour and theoretical framework;
- Relevance and recency of the bibliography;
- Clarity, consistency, and quality of the article’s writing.
After receiving the reviews, the author(s) will have a deadline, to be agreed upon between the Team and the respective author(s), to submit a revised version of the article in accordance with the suggestions of the reviewers and the Team. However, upon receiving a peer review recommending significant changes to the article, the Editorial Team reserves the right to refuse its publication. The author(s) should mark, whenever possible, the changes made using the revision tool in Microsoft Word or other similar software.
The Team will conduct a final check of the text before publishing, rectifying any formatting, grammatical, and/or spelling inaccuracies.
