Revista Criterios is an open-access, multidisciplinary scientific journal focused on disseminating research results from various fields of knowledge, based on disciplinary and interdisciplinary approaches. It is published by Editorial de la Universidad Mariana, Colombia, and is aimed at researchers, academics, authors, and readers, both nationally and internationally. The journal is published on a continuous basis, with the aim of streamlining editorial processes and promoting the timely dissemination of scientific knowledge. It publishes articles in Spanish, English, and Portuguese, mainly in the following categories: a) research articles; b) reflection articles; and c) review articles. The costs associated with the editorial processes and procedures are borne by the publisher.

Types of articles published in the journal

Revista Criterios focuses its essential function on the publication of original and unpublished articles resulting from research.

Research article: a document that presents original and unpublished scientific, technological, or academic production and, in detail, the original results of research processes. Preferably structured as follows: Introduction, Methodology, Results, Discussion, Conclusions, and References.

Reflection article: a manuscript that presents research results from an analytical, interpretative, or critical perspective of the author, on a specific topic, using original sources.

Review article: manuscript resulting from research, which analyzes, systematizes, and integrates the results of published research on a field of study, to give an account of the advances and tendencies of development. It is characterized by a careful bibliographic review of at least 50 references from primary sources.

Editorial: document written by the editor, any member of the Editorial Committee, or by a person invited by the editor. The editorial may be related to current problems or new findings in the field of action of the journal.

Conditions for the submission of the manuscript

For the submission of manuscripts, it is necessary to prepare the document according to the type of articles that the journal requires; therefore, those nominations that do not meet the declared conditions will not be considered for publication.

The opinions and affirmations present in the articles are the sole responsibility of the authors, understanding that sending the manuscript to this journal commits them not to submit it partially, completely, simultaneously, or successively to other journals or publishing entities.

Likewise, the authors must declare that the contents developed in the manuscript are their own and that the information taken from other authors and published works, articles, and documents is correctly cited and verifiable in the bibliographical references section of the text.

All manuscripts that are submitted for publication in the journal must follow the guidelines specified in this guide, which, for the most part, have been adapted from the Publications Manual of the American Psychological Association APA 7^th edition. In addition, the title, abstract, and keywords must be presented in Spanish, English, and Portuguese.

Manuscripts to apply must be sent through the Open Journal Systems (OJS), the system of the journal page https://revistas.umariana.edu.co/index.php/Criterios/user/register, prior user registration -author- on this platform, once all the above requirements and those of composition presented below are met:

In both options, the author will be notified of the receipt of the article within a maximum period of ten days after sending it and the status of the article will be reported within a maximum period of two months.

The magazine manages an open call that receives articles permanently; that is, the moment the sending is made, the evaluation process begins. The number and date of publication will depend on the order of arrival or entry of the articles to the journal and on the completion of the evaluation process.

To formalize receipt of the article, the following form must be sent, duly completed:

Declaration of originality and authorization of use form: document containing the author's details, the declaration of originality of the article, and the authorization of use granted to the journal and the publisher for the dissemination and promotion of the manuscript.

General aspects: the applicant manuscripts must be submitted in the Microsoft Word program (download Template), one column, on letter size paper with equal margins of 2 cm, using the typefaces specified in the template, with single spacing (1.0) and a maximum length of 7,500 words, including figures (images, graphs, and photographs), tables and references.

Title: it will be clear, concrete, and precise; it will have a footnote where the characteristics of the investigative, review, or reflection process developed for the concretion of the scriptural contribution are specified; in this note, the type of article and the title of the research from which it is derived must be classified; likewise, the name and funding source of the research or project from which the article derives.

Example footer: this article is the result of the investigation entitled: Oral argumentative competence in primary school students, developed from January 15, 2009, to July 31, 2011, in the township of Genoy, department of Nariño, Colombia.

Author(s): the name of the author(s) must be located under the title of the manuscript and, at the bottom of the page, the following data for each case: academic level –the highest degree achieved, with the respective granting institution–, institutional affiliation – full name of the work institution–, contact information –email, personal and institutional, city, department, province, country of residence–, the ORCID code and the link to the Google Scholar profile. It must be taken into account that the first author will be the one who will be registered in the databases of the different indexing and summary services. It is essential to indicate the author who will be in charge of receiving and sending the correspondence; otherwise, it will be assumed that the first author will take over this function.

Example: Pepito Alfredo Pérez Rodríguez¹

________________________________

¹ PhD Candidate in Education (Universidad de San Buenaventura). Director of the Universidad Mariana Research Center. Member of the Forma research group. Email: pperezr@umariana.edu.co ORCID code: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1369-0199. Link Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.es/citations?user=xwTivN0AAAAJ&hl=esp

Contribution: the level of writing contribution of the article and the contribution of each one of the authors are identified, to establish the order of appearance. 

Example: 

Pepito Pérez Buriticá: Principal investigator. Statistical data processing, writing of materials and methods, and obtaining the results.

María Chamorro Solarte: Analysis and interpretation of results, writing of the introduction, methods, discussion, and conclusions.

All the authors participated in the preparation of the manuscript, read it, and approved it.

Abstract: it will include the main objectives of the investigation, the scope, the methodology used, the most outstanding results, and the most outstanding conclusions; therefore, this section will be clear, coherent, and concise, and will not exceed 250 words. 

Keywords: a minimum of five keywords and a maximum of ten will be admitted, which will make it possible to locate the content of the article thematically; they should be relevant and help cross-indexing since, through them, the work will be easily identified by database search engines; they are separated by semicolons. Preferably, use descriptors such as Desc, Mesh, and UNESCO Thesaurus, among others.

In the case of manuscripts resulting from research, these will be structured as follows: 

Introduction: where the problem or objectives of the investigative process are mentioned, alluding to the possible background on which the investigative work is based; likewise, the type of methodology used is commented on, a justification for its choice, as well as the pertinent and precise inclusion of the bibliographic support that theoretically supports this first approach to the content of the manuscript.

Methodology: this section mentions the design, techniques, and materials used to obtain the results; it is recommended to develop it descriptively, indicating all the aspects conceived at the time of carrying out the process; that is, clearly expressing the type of design and sampling that were used. It is convenient to refer to the statistical techniques and other instruments used to collect the information – this section must be written with verbs in the past tense. 

Results: this section presents the results of the investigative process; specifically, the contribution made to new knowledge, where the coherence between the objectives set at the beginning of the investigation and the information obtained through the collection instruments are evident. It is advisable to mention all the important results obtained, even those that are in opposition to the hypothesis that supported the research.

Discussion: in this section, there are those relationships, interpretations, and recommendations, that the results obtained indicate, in parallel with other investigations, backgrounds, and theories related to the topic addressed. 

Conclusions: they are presented in a clear, concrete, and coherent way with the themes developed in the manuscript; therefore, they will have precise arguments that justify and validate each one of them.

Figures and tables: in the case of figures (graphs, diagrams, maps, drawings, photographs, and illustrations), they must be located in the respective place within the text; they will be numbered and described with a legend at the top left that begins with the word ‘Figure’, where the content of the elements arranged therein is briefly stated, in italics and without a full stop. In the case of tables, they must contain -preferably- the quantitative information mentioned in the text; they are numbered and will have a descriptive legend located in the upper left part of the element, which will begin with the word ‘Table’; its description must be in italics and without a period. Tables are not accepted as images; they must be inserted in the file. For all figures and tables, the source from which they are taken will be indicated; please, refrain from locating material that does not have the written permission of the author and the participants (attach the signed consent), as well as the quality and readability. Use the figures and tables only when necessary, without redounding the information they express with the textual content; likewise, they will be self-explanatory, simple, and easy to understand. The figures must be sent in independent files with a minimum of 300 dpi in JPG or PNG format.

Conflict of interest: the authors must declare if they have financial conflicts (financial aid: money, payments in kind, or any type of aid), personal (friendship or enmity), political (party membership), intellectual (disagree with the editorial line of the magazine), racist, religious, among others, that could compromise the reliability of this publication. 

Ethical responsibilities: research involving human beings must be carried out ethically and have duly completed informed consent. A statement of approval from the Ethics or Bioethics Committee or, whoever acts as such in the institution, must be included, as well as a brief description mentioning how and from whom consent was obtained. 

Funding Sources: Transparently declaring sources of funding contributes to the integrity of scientific publishing. It is the responsibility of the authors to disclose whether their research was funded, by whom, and to include: the full name of the funding entity (institution, organization, company, etc.); the project number or grant code (if applicable); acknowledgment of all support received, even partial; and the avoidance of ambiguities that could lead to conflicts of interest.

Example 1: The research work from which this article is derived was funded by [Name of Funder], [City], [Country], through project No. XXX.

Example 2: The author declares that no specific funding was received for this research. 

Artificial Intelligence Use Statement: If AI tools were used in one of the four cases permitted by the journal, provide the information accordingly. If no such tools were used, it must be explicitly stated that the manuscript was developed without AI assistance.

Example 1: In the preparation of this article, the author(s) used the tool/service '[Name of Tool/Service]' for language editing, translation, data analysis, and/or brightness, contrast, and/or color balance adjustments in tables and/or figures. Following the use of this tool/service, the author(s) carefully reviewed and revised the content; therefore, they take full responsibility for the publication.

Example 2: In the preparation of this article, the author(s) did not use any artificial intelligence tools or services in the development of the manuscript.

Quotations

References

It is the last section of the manuscript. All cited references should appear here; their order will be established alphabetically and following the provisions of the Publications Manual of the American Psychological Association APA 7^th edition. 60% of the cited material must not be more than five years old.

Next, the types of sources most used when structuring a scientific manuscript are presented, as well as the format and corresponding example for each case. It is recommended to include the DOI of those articles, books, or book chapters that are available online.

Editorial and peer review process

With the prior authorization of the author(s), the pertinent adjustments to the manuscripts will be made, to give greater precision, clarity, and coherence to the applicant’s written proposal, for which all those interested in sending their contributions are requested to write with as rigorously as possible, duly using the spelling and grammar rules of scientific writing, structuring the manuscript in general, through clear, coherent, and objective paragraphs. It is suggested to avoid redundancies, repetitive use of expressions, concepts, and terms “among others” and, similarly, avoid the unnecessary use of acronyms.

Being a refereed journal, rigorous evaluation and validation processes are carried out on the applicant manuscripts, so the estimated time for the optimal development of these processes and procedures is between two and five months, depending, of course, on the quantity and quality of the postulated manuscripts.

In the first instance, the Editorial Committee of the journal decides on their acceptance or rejection, based on compliance with the policies, criteria, provisions, and conditions that the publication has established for the initial acceptance of the written contributions -manuscript evaluation process by the Editorial Committee and results of the submission to the coincidence software implemented by Editorial Unimar–. Both affirmative and negative provisions will be communicated to the authors, who will know the reasons why the manuscript was accepted or rejected. 

In the second instance, the editor of the journal, together with the Editorial Committee, selects those manuscripts that meet the qualities required by the publication, classifying them later according to their area and theme addressed, to assign two peer reviewers, in coherence with the evaluation system adopted by the journal, -double-blind-, who, through the evaluation format provided for the said procedure, will make the observations and suggestions that may arise, expressing whether it can effectively be published, if certain elements need to be improved for possible publication or, conversely, it is not accepted for publication in the journal. The Editorial Committee receives the concepts of the peer reviewers and makes the arrangements regarding the final publication of the article.

The editor sends each peer reviewer the Guide for peer reviewers of the journal and the review format corresponding to the submitted manuscript (research, review, or reflection article). For the opportune development of the evaluation process, each of them is assigned a period between two and three weeks to prepare and submit the concept. It is worth mentioning that, in the evaluation format, they are asked to indicate whether the manuscript meets the conditions and criteria, both in terms of form and content, required by the journal. In addition, they will elaborate a general concept about the manuscript, where they include suggestions, observations, and contributions; subsequently, they may recommend the publication of the manuscript, either without any modification, with some modifications, with profound modifications, or it will not be published at all.

Therefore, in the evaluation format provided by the journal, the peers are asked if they are willing to re-evaluate the manuscript if the authors make the adjustments and observations that have been commented on, to continue the process, until the manuscript is an article with all the quality conditions to be published.

Once the editor receives the concepts from the two peer reviewers, he prepares a detailed report of the review process to send to the authors; said report compiles the observations and suggestions of the peers, of course, suppressing all information that could reveal and identify them. When the authors already have the evaluation report of their postulated manuscript, they will decide if they present it again with the modifications and adjustments that the peers refer to submitting a new version of their writing or, on the contrary, they definitively withdraw it from the process. If the authors decide to submit the improved version of the text again, the editor assigns a fair date –according to the modifications, corrections, and adjustments– for the delivery of this second version of the manuscript. If the authors decide not to continue with the publication process of the manuscript, it will be removed from the journal’s database.

In the case of manuscripts completely rejected by the peer reviewers, the authors will be informed that their manuscript will be withdrawn from the process and the journal’s databases; additionally, they will be sent the evaluation report with the concepts that the peers determined for making this decision.

Once the authors have sent the second improved version of the manuscript, taking into account all the observations, adjustments, and other suggestions made by the peer reviewers, the editor sends the latter the second version, to check whether the changes, adjustments, and suggestions were made by the authors, requesting their evaluation and stating to the editor if it is in optimal conditions to be published without any other modification or, on the contrary, the writing will have to be adjusted again, as long as its publication is desired.

For the final preparation of the manuscript, the editor receives the concepts from the peer reviewers. If the two peers consider that the manuscript can be published, the editor sends these concepts together with the final version of the manuscript to the Editorial Committee, to verify the rigor and quality of the process and, likewise, determine the acceptance or rejection of the manuscript for publication. It is worth mentioning that, if the concepts of the two evaluators regarding the manuscript are contradictory and controversial, a third evaluator will be appointed to issue a concept that allows for solving said impasse. On the other hand, if one of the peer reviewers considers that the manuscript is not yet ready for publication, the editor will send new observations and recommendations of the manuscript to the authors, until the manuscript is ready.

The authors may respond to the comments and observations made by the peer reviewers, to give an explanation and justify that some suggested adjustments will not be taken into account, for which a blind dialogue will be established between authors and peer reviewers, to discuss the relevance of the observations and suggested adjustments, of course, mediated by the Editorial Committee of the journal.

In addition to the above, it should be noted that, before publication in the journal, the galley proofs will be sent to the authors, who will review the layout of the article. It is necessary to clarify that at this stage new paragraphs, phrases, or sections to be added will not be accepted, since the process will only be limited to correcting possible typing errors so that they contribute to the improvement of the final version of the magazine.

The journal has the Open Journal Systems (OJS) system https://revistas.umariana.edu.co/index.php/Criterios through which authors can be aware of the status of their manuscript since it enables effective management and efficiency of editorial processes and procedures. Likewise, if they wish, they can request information via email: editorialunimar@umariana.edu.co

Writing calls

At any time of the year, authors can submit their manuscripts for possible publication in the journal.

Considerations

Those authors who publish their articles in the journal will receive notification of the publication and access to the electronic version. In the case of peer reviewers, in addition to receiving a copy of the electronic magazine, they will also have a certificate of their participation as reviewers.

Additional Information

The journal is managed through OJS https://revistas.umariana.edu.co/index.php/unimar, where all information concerning the journal (e-ISSN – ISSN-L) can be found. It is essential to note that the “Guide for Authors,” the “Template,” and the “Declaration of Originality and Authorization of Use Form,” which are fundamental documents and forms in the process of submitting a manuscript for evaluation, can be downloaded from the addresses mentioned above.

Revista Criterios has a policy on the use of artificial intelligence that authors must be aware of and apply rigorously. Ignorance of this policy may result in the rejection of a manuscript or the retraction of a publication.