Peer review process

From the time the manuscript is received in the journal's system until it is approved for publication, there are four stages or phases that need to be understood by authors and reviewers:


1. Initial Review by the Editor

The editor will assess the manuscript to ensure that all the required initial conditions for submission have been met. This includes evaluating the scientific writing quality, organization of sections, writing style, and citation format, among others.

If the editor finds any issues, they may request revisions or reject the paper (desk rejection).

The author will be informed of the outcome of this stage. If the manuscript meets the requirements, the process of searching for peer reviewers will commence.


2. Search for Peer Review

The blind peer review will be conducted by reviewers registered in the JTS's journal system (OJS) who are carefully selected and approved by the editor(s).

At least two review forms/reports per manuscript will be collected in the system.

Reviewers cannot be members of the editorial board and must meet the following criteria:

  • Hold a Ph.D. degree or be a recognized expert in the field;
  • Not have published with the author(s) in the last 5 years;
  • Have no conflict of interest regarding the author(s) and their manuscript(s);
  • Be impartial, with no personal contact with the authors preferred.


3. Evaluation by Reviewers

Peer reviewers will be asked by the Editor to evaluate the manuscript.

They have a period of two weeks to complete the review but may request an extension if needed.

The evaluation will be conducted using an assessment tool provided by the journal and submitted through the journal's system.

Reviewers will classify the manuscript into one of three categories:

  • Positive with Recommendations: The reviewer suggests changes to improve the manuscript's content and format for publication. The author will be asked to make the necessary changes and resubmit a revised version.
  • Positive with No Recommendations: The reviewer considers the content and treatment of the manuscript appropriate for publication, with minor format changes may be required.
  • Rejected: The manuscript does not meet the quality standards or formatting guidelines of the journal. The reviewer must provide a summary of their evaluation, but this should not be considered a comprehensive explanation.


4. Editor's Decision

Upon receiving a positive evaluation, the Editor will make the final decision to publish the manuscript.

The Editor may consult the editorial board if necessary.

The peer review evaluation is a factor in the decision, but publication ultimately depends on all observations and corrections being implemented.

The decision to publish is made by the Editor-in-Chief of the journal and is final.

Upon acceptance, the corresponding author will receive an acceptance email signed by the Editor-in-Chief.

The selection of articles for each volume/issue is based on their relevance to the journal, not solely on the reviewers' evaluations.