Peer Review Process

Manuscript Evaluation Process at Horizonte Científico International Journal (HCIJ)

Horizonte Científico International Journal (HCIJ), published semiannually by AsesoresEducativos SAS since January 2023, is a multidisciplinary academic journal committed to the dissemination of high-impact scientific research across various fields of knowledge. Its editorial evaluation is based on a double-blind peer review system, ensuring objectivity, originality, and rigor in every submission, in alignment with the highest international standards.

Manuscripts are evaluated by experts with proven academic and research credentials, carefully selected by the Editorial Board. Reviewers must have no conflict of interest with the content being assessed and are responsible for validating the manuscript’s thematic relevance, methodological soundness, and adherence to the journal’s editorial guidelines.

HCIJ maintains a growing network of international reviewers, composed of researchers holding postgraduate degrees (preferably PhDs) and with publications indexed in recognized databases such as Scopus and Web of Science.

The entire review process is confidential. Reviewers must treat manuscript content with strict discretion and are prohibited from sharing or using the evaluated material for personal or institutional purposes. If additional reviewers are needed, the authors will be notified in advance.

This rigorous editorial process reflects HCIJ’s commitment to scientific excellence and the advancement of multidisciplinary knowledge.

Initial Editorial Review

In the first stage, the editorial team conducts a preliminary assessment of all submitted manuscripts. Within 72 hours, authors receive confirmation of submission and a unique tracking number.

The Editor-in-Chief or a delegated editor evaluates the manuscript's alignment with the journal’s scope and editorial policies, considering criteria such as originality, relevance, and scientific contribution.

Manuscripts that fall outside the journal’s focus, lack structural clarity, or show signs of plagiarism may be rejected during this phase. When necessary, the team may consult the Scientific Committee.

Submissions that pass this stage are forwarded to peer reviewers. Within 30 days of submission, authors are informed of the review status, and manuscripts are assigned to specialized reviewers.

Double-Blind Peer Review

All manuscripts that pass the initial screening are subject to double-blind peer review, ensuring that both authors and reviewers remain anonymous.

Reviewers follow a structured evaluation format, which includes criteria such as:

  • Relevance and potential impact of the study

  • Conceptual clarity and coherence of the argument

  • Theoretical foundation and use of updated references

  • Methodological rigor and validity of the research design

  • Depth of analysis and consistency in interpretation

  • Originality and strength of conclusions

The peer review process is expected to take up to 30 days. Once completed, authors receive an editorial decision. If revisions are requested, authors are given a window of 8 to 15 days to submit a revised version.

Editorial Quality Control

After the peer review, manuscripts undergo editorial quality review, focusing on language, structure, and formatting. Acceptance at this stage does not imply immediate publication, as final inclusion depends on editorial policy, thematic priorities, and the publication schedule.

Editorial Workflow Details

Role of the Academic Editor
The Academic Editor oversees the entire evaluation process and may request additional reviews if deemed necessary. Reviewers are allotted 8 days to complete their evaluations. Any delays will be communicated to the authors.

Reviewer Confidentiality
Reviewer identities are kept confidential throughout the process, unless reviewers choose to disclose their identity voluntarily.

Number of Reviewers
Each manuscript is reviewed by two experts. A third reviewer may be assigned in cases of conflicting evaluations or if additional depth is required.

Monitoring the Review Process
Once authors submit their revised manuscripts, the status is updated to “Revisions completed.” However, this does not guarantee acceptance, as additional rounds of review may be required before a final decision is issued.

Final Decision
The final decision regarding publication rests with the Academic Editor, who makes a determination based on the reviewers’ reports and their own editorial judgment. The decision is formally communicated through the journal’s submission system and via email. Until that point, the status will appear as “Decision in process.”