Information For Authors
EDITORIAL PROCESS FOR ARTICLE SUBMISSIONS TO ISRTIC
It is necessary to register including the ORCID identifier and log in to submit article proposals following the journal’s editorial guidelines and to verify the status of current submissions.
Submission formats
Articles must be written using the official template (download template). Authors must also complete and sign the following documents: Publication agreement letter and Submission checklist.
If accepted, articles will be formatted by the journal’s editorial team under the Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 license.
Original articles in Spanish or English are accepted, as long as they are not being simultaneously submitted to other journals. The recommended length is between 8 and 16 pages. Exceptions may be made for longer manuscripts when justified by their content or scope.
For inquiries, contact the Editor-in-Chief, Dr. Jorge Párraga Álava (jorge.parraga@utm.edu.ec) or the journal email revista.iys@utm.edu.ec.
Mandatory submission components
- a. Publication agreement letter* (signed by the corresponding author).
- b. Submission checklist*.
- c. Article without author information* (for blind review).
- d. Reviewer response form (after receiving reviewer comments).
- e. Plagiarism report* (issued by the editorial team).
- f. Article with author information (upon acceptance).
- g. Other: supplementary files (comments, final versions, etc.).
* Required to begin peer review.
Peer Review Process
ISRTIC is a peer-reviewed journal that implements a double-blind review process, in which both reviewers and authors remain anonymous. The evaluation is conducted by academic experts external to Universidad Técnica de Manabí, with demonstrated expertise in the subject area. The review process follows the steps outlined below:
- Manuscripts are submitted exclusively through the Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform and must include three required components: (a) the manuscript without author information, (b) the signed publication agreement letter, and (c) the submission checklist.
- The Editorial Board conducts an initial screening to assess thematic relevance, compliance with formatting guidelines, and basic scientific quality (e.g., argumentative coherence, methodological clarity, originality).
- Submissions that pass this initial check undergo plagiarism detection using specialized software. The maximum allowable similarity index is 10% (excluding quoted material and references). Manuscripts exceeding this threshold will be returned or rejected.
- If compliant, the manuscript is assigned to two anonymous peer reviewers for evaluation. Reviewers must be subject matter experts with no conflicts of interest regarding the manuscript content.
- The review process may include up to two rounds of evaluation. During this time, authors may be contacted for clarification. Revisions must be submitted within 15 calendar days. Failure to respond within the deadline may result in rejection.
- If a manuscript is not accepted but is deemed relevant, the Editorial Board may invite the authors to submit a substantially revised version as a new submission.
Reviewers use a standardized evaluation form that assesses criteria such as originality, relevance, writing clarity, methodological rigor, and scientific contribution. All reviewer comments are shared with the authors, and the final editorial decision is made by the Editorial Board based on the reviewers’ recommendations and the overall quality of the manuscript.
Evaluation criteria – First round
- General assessment: Brief synopsis, contribution, originality.
- Comments: Argumentation, methodology, results, and discussion.
- Novelty: Excellent, Good, Fair, Poor.
- Technical content: Excellent, Good, Fair, Poor.
- Presentation quality: Excellent, Good, Fair, Poor.
Evaluation criteria – Second round
The reviewer must indicate whether the requested changes were made, justifying their final decision. Annotated manuscripts may be attached if needed.
Possible reviewer decisions
- Accept this submission
- Publishable with minor revisions
- Resubmit for review
- Resubmit to another publication
- Not publishable
Estimated review and publication time
The average peer review period is 3 months. One additional month is estimated from acceptance to final publication.
Ethical Policies and Author Responsibilities
1. Author responsibility statement
All authors must declare their individual responsibility in the conception, design, analysis, and interpretation of the work. The corresponding author certifies that all co-authors have read and approved the final manuscript.
2. Conflicts of interest and editorial ethics
Authors must clearly state whether any conflicts of interest exist related to the manuscript. This includes financial, institutional, or personal matters. Submission implies acceptance of the journal's ethical guidelines and the rejection of plagiarism or data manipulation.
3. Ethics committee approval (if applicable)
Studies involving human and/or animal subjects must have prior approval from an ethics committee, clearly stated in the manuscript. Supporting documentation may be requested by the journal.
4. Bibliographic standards
Articles must follow APA 7th edition citation style. This includes in-text citations, reference formatting, and proper attribution of data, methods, software, and supplementary materials.
5. Keywords or descriptors
Articles must include 4 to 6 keywords in both Spanish and English, preferably using controlled vocabularies such as UNESCO or DeCS.
6. Affiliation presentation
Institutional affiliations must only be included in the final accepted version. Full name of the institution, city, province, and country should be provided.
7. Copyright
Accepted articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) license. Authors retain rights and allow non-commercial distribution without modification.
8. Author contribution statement
Each author's specific contribution must be described following the CRediT taxonomy.
