Peer Review Policy

Cuadernos de Historia Cultural follows a rigorous and transparent peer review process designed to maintain the scholarly quality, originality, and academic integrity of the journal. All research manuscripts submitted to the journal are first subject to an initial editorial assessment to determine whether they are relevant to the journal's scope, meet basic academic and presentation requirements, and demonstrate sufficient scholarly merit for further consideration.

Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial screening are normally evaluated through a double-blind peer review process, in which the identities of authors and reviewers are kept confidential to the extent practicable. Manuscripts are assigned to qualified reviewers with appropriate expertise in the subject area. Reviewers are selected based on their academic qualifications, research expertise, and ability to provide an objective and constructive assessment of the submitted work.

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts according to criteria including originality, relevance to the field, clarity of research objectives or arguments, theoretical and methodological soundness, quality of analysis, appropriate use of sources, organization and presentation, academic significance, and contribution to existing scholarship. Reviewers may recommend acceptance, acceptance subject to revisions, resubmission after substantial revision, or rejection. The final editorial decision is made by the journal's editorial team after considering the reviewers' recommendations and the overall quality and suitability of the manuscript.

Reviewers are expected to maintain strict confidentiality concerning all manuscripts received for evaluation. They should not disclose, reproduce, distribute, or use unpublished information from a manuscript for personal or professional purposes. Reviewers should provide fair, objective, respectful, and sufficiently detailed comments that can assist authors in improving their work. Personal criticism of authors is not appropriate.

Reviewers are also expected to declare any actual or potential conflict of interest before undertaking a review. A reviewer should decline an assignment when personal, professional, institutional, financial, or other circumstances could reasonably affect their impartiality. Reviewers should not evaluate manuscripts where they have a close professional or personal relationship with an author or where they have a competing interest that could compromise independent judgment.

Authors may be requested to revise their manuscripts in response to reviewer and editorial comments. Revised manuscripts should address the issues raised during peer review and may be returned to the original reviewers or evaluated by the editorial team as appropriate. Where authors disagree with a reviewer comment, they should provide a reasoned academic response rather than simply disregarding the recommendation.

The editorial team may seek additional reviews when reviewer recommendations substantially differ, when specialist expertise is required, or when clarification is necessary before reaching a decision. The number of reviewers may therefore vary according to the nature and complexity of the manuscript.

The journal is committed to protecting the integrity of the peer review process. Editorial decisions are based on scholarly considerations rather than personal characteristics, institutional affiliation, nationality, gender, or other irrelevant factors. Editors and reviewers are expected to observe appropriate standards of confidentiality, impartiality, academic integrity, and professional conduct throughout the review process.

The peer review process is intended to support both editorial decision-making and the improvement of scholarly manuscripts. While reviewer recommendations are an important part of the evaluation process, they are advisory, and the final decision regarding publication rests with the editorial team of Cuadernos de Historia Cultural.