Policies

Editorial policy criteria

* Korpus 21 is edited by El Colegio Mexiquense, A.C., through its Scientific Outreach Unit.

* Korpus 21 declares its scientific objectives, thematic coverage and target audience on its home page.

* Korpus 21 declares the formation of an editorial team responsible for the application of its policy and management, made up of a management and collegiate bodies, individually identifying its members and indicating their institutional affiliation in the "About" tab.

* Korpus 21 expressly requires articles to be original and unpublished.

* Korpus 21 declares that 100% of the content of the publication is original research in the scientific and academic field.

* Korpus 21 declares to be open to the majority participation of authors outside El Colegio Mexiquense, A.C.

* Korpus 21 declares that it collaborates with a large portfolio of referees outside its editorial team and El Colegio Mexiquense, A.C.

* Korpus 21 declares that all the members of its Scientific Advisory Council are external to El Colegio Mexiquense, A.C.

* Korpus 21 declares that it has a Good Practices Guide that describes the responsibilities of editors, authors and referees, and specifies the guidelines for the resolution of editorial conflicts of any nature.

 Peer review

Once received, the text will be submitted to a preliminary review by the Editorial Committee, which will determine its thematic relevance for the journal. Once the Committee deems the article or essay pertinent for publication in Korpus21, and it has been verified that it meets the editorial requirements established in the normative guidelines, two referees will be appointed -external to the author's institution-, who will be responsible for recommending (or not) the publication of each article or essay. The referees will be experts on the subject and their identity, as well as that of the author, will be kept anonymous at all times.

The appointed referees will determine anonymously:

  1. Publication without recommendations.
  2. Publish with optional recommendations and minor corrections. Article will be published once the author has complied with the indicated minor corrections.
  3. Publication with mandatory recommendations and major corrections. Article will be published once the author has made a thorough revision according to the indications. If at the end of the review process it is considered that the recommendations have not been met, the document will be rejected.
  4. Not publishable.

 

For an article or essay to be published, it must have at least two positive reviews. In the event that a manuscript has one positive and one negative opinion, it will be sent to a third referee, who will define the result. The results of the academic opinion process will be final in all cases.

The documents will be forwarded for review by the referees who so request on three occasions, at most. Exceeded this limit, the article or essay will be dismissed. A period of 15 days will be given for the author to make the indicated corrections.

Each journal fascicle will be made up of the articles that at the close of the edition have completed the review process and will be assigned a number in the order in which they are released by the referees for publication.

During the evaluation process and, where appropriate, during the editing process, the Editorial Committee, the Director or the Responsible Editor may request some changes, as well as consult the author on any aspect of form or content that is relevant.

If you are interested in collaborating with us as a referee, please write to us at: korpus21@cmq.edu.mx

Review format

Important: The review must be of high quality, rigorous, specialized and sufficiently argued. The rigor of the evaluations should be appreciated in the respective reviews and in the generosity in offering suggestions for improvement:

We ask you to organize your review according to the following points:

  • General opinion:
  • Assessment of the potential impact of the text:
  • Most important contributions of the text:
  1. Empirical:
  2. Methodological:
  3. Theoretical:
  • Main limitations of the text:
  • Suggestions to improve the text:

Research question or problem

Does the author adequately formulate a research question?

  • yes
  • no

Originality of the text

Is it an original article?

  • yes
  • no

Consistency and structure of the argument

 

Does the article propose and develop a methodology and use adequate tools to tackle the investigation?

  • yes
  • no

Does it solve the research question?

Writing and proper use of critical apparatus

Is there an adequate wording and use of the critical apparatus?

  • Yes
  • no

Are the bibliography and sources used relevant and sufficient?

  • Yes
  • no

Assessment

On a scale of 5 to 10 (5 being the lowest score and 10 being the highest), indicate the general rating you would give the text (considering its quality, originality, scientific contribution, relevance, etc.):

  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10

Review

 

The text was reviewed promptly, therefore the final decision is as follows: 

  • Publication without recommendations
  • Release with optional recommendations and minor corrections. It is recommended to publish once the author has complied with the indicated minor corrections.
  • Publication with mandatory recommendations and major corrections. It is recommended to publish after the author has made a thorough revision according to the indications. If at the end of the review process the referee considers that the recommendations indicated have not been met, the document will be rejected.
  • Not publishable.
  • Publication without recommendations
  • Publish with optional recommendations and minor corrections
  • Publish with mandatory recommendations and major corrections
  • not publishable

Rationale for recommendations

 

Justify your assessment of each of the criteria (particularly the negative ones).

Mandatory, minimum length of 300 words in Times New Roman , 12 points, line spacing of 1.5. The idea is that the review helps the authors as much as possible to improve their work and allows the journal to make consistent and solid decisions.

Important: The review must be of high quality, rigorous, specialized and sufficiently argued. The rigor of the evaluations should be appreciated in the respective reviews and in the generosity in offering suggestions for improvement:

 

We ask you to organize your opinion according to the following points:

  • General opinion:
  • Assessment of the potential impact of the text:
  • Most important contributions of the text:
  1. Empirical:
  2. Methodological:
  3. Theoretical:
  • Main limitations of the text:
  • Suggestions to improve the text:

 

 

Ethics and good practice guidelines

The instance that defines the editorial policy of El Colegio Mexiquense, A.C. is its Editorial Committee, made up of the General Secretary, the Research and Teaching coordinators, the heads of the Publications and Information Technologies and Communications units, the director of the magazine Economía, Sociedad y Territorio , the director of Korpus 21 and three academic members, whose function is to review and, where appropriate, approve the works that are proposed for publication. In addition to this instance, Korpus 21 has an (international) Advisory Council and an Editorial Committee.

The Advisory Council is the journal's consultative body. It is made up of prominent foreign and Mexican researchers, whose opinion is considered valuable to preserve and improve the quality, prestige and dedication of the journal to History and Social Sciences. Their tasks are to procure and recommend the publication of articles, essays and reviews, collaborate in the opinion of the contributions they receive or suggest qualified reviewers.

Responsibilities or behavior of the Editorial Committee and the Direction

  1. Manuscripts submitted for publication will be considered solely based on their academic and scientific merit.
  2. Responsibility for accepting or rejecting a manuscript rests with the Directorate and the Editorial Committee, who will base their decision on the corresponding anonymous reviews.
  3. In the event that the opinions do not coincide, the text will be sent to a third referee.
  4. The principle of double-blind review will be maintained at all times and the names of the reviewers of a particular article may not be disclosed, unless one of them expressly requests to reveal their identity.
  5. The Management and the Editorial Committee may reject manuscripts that they consider inappropriate, because they deal with topics not directly related to the journal's areas of specialization.
  6. The description of the peer review process is defined and disclosed by the Editorial Committee so that the authors know what the evaluation criteria are. The Editorial Committee will always be willing to justify any controversy in the evaluation process.

 

Responsibilities or behavior of the Responsible Editor

  1. Responsible for everything published in the magazine. Should strive to meet the needs of readers and authors; constantly improve the magazine; ensure the quality of the material it publishes; advance academic and scientific standards. On the other hand, should be willing to post corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies when necessary.
  2. Decision to accept or reject a paper for publication should be based solely on the article's or essay's importance, originality, clarity, and relevance to the journal.
  3. Guarantee the confidentiality of the evaluation process by maintaining the identity of reviewers and authors concealed from each other.
  4. Responsible for deciding which articles or essays can be accepted for review while the Editorial Committee will make the final decision about the documents to be published.
  5. Responsible for informing the author about the editorial process that the submissions undergo, as well as of the final outcome of the peer review.
  6. Evaluates the manuscripts and their intellectual content without distinction of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, nationality or the political philosophy of the authors.
  7. The Responsible Editor and the editorial team will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, or other editorial advisors.
  8. Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript will not be used in the personal research of an editor, without the express written consent of the author. Inside information or ideas obtained through peer review will remain confidential and will not be used for personal gain. Editors must make fair and impartial decisions and ensure a fair and appropriate peer review process.

 

Author Responsibilities

  1. Authors must guarantee that their manuscripts are the product of their original work and that the data has been obtained in an ethical manner. In addition, they must guarantee that their work has not been previously published or is not being considered in another publication. A work will be considered as previously published when any of the following situations occurs:
  • When the full text has been published.
  • When extensive fragments of previously published materials are part of the manuscript sent to the Journal.

 

These criteria refer to previous publications in print or electronic form and in any language.

 

  1. For the publication of their manuscripts, the authors must strictly follow the rules for the publication of articles or essays defined by the Editorial Committee.
  2. The authors will send the Journal an original of the article or essay without personal information (name, contact information, affiliation, etc.) and excluding their name from the bibliographical references in which it appears.
  3. Authors of original research reports must present a precise description of the work carried out, as well as an objective discussion of its importance. The underlying data must be accurately represented in the article or essay. A document must contain sufficient detail and references to enable others to use the work. Fraudulent or deliberately inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
  4. Authors must ensure that they have written the original works in their entirety, and if the authors have used the works and/or words of others they must be properly cited. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical editorial conduct and is unacceptable. Consequently, any manuscript found to be plagiarized will be removed and not considered for publication.
  5. An author should not, in general, publish manuscripts that describe essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal constitutes unethical behavior and its publication is unacceptable.
  6. Sources must be properly acknowledged. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in the nature of the work presented. Information obtained privately, such as in conversations, correspondence or discussions with third parties, should not be used without the explicit written permission of the source.
  7. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. The main author or authors must ensure that all co-authors are included in the article or essay, and that all have seen and approved the final version of the document and have agreed to submit it for publication.
  8. All authors must disclose in their manuscript any financial or other conflicts of interest that could influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed.
  9. When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his or her published work, it is his or her obligation to immediately notify the Journal or Publisher Management and cooperate with the Responsible Editor to retract or correct the paper.

 

Reviewer Responsibilities

  1. The reviewers must notify any unethical conduct by the authors and point out all the information that may be a reason for rejecting the publication of the articles and essays. In addition, they must commit to keeping the information related to the documents they evaluate confidential.
  2. In order to review the manuscripts, the reviewers must have access to the guidelines to carry out this task. These guidelines must be provided by the Responsible Editor and are the ones that must be considered for the evaluation.
  3. All selected reviewers must notify the Responsible Editor as soon as possible if they are qualified to review the research of a manuscript or if they are unable to do the review.
  4. Any manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document. It should not be shown or discussed with other experts, except with the authorization of the Responsible Editor.
  5. Reviewers must conduct themselves objectively. Any personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers must express their points of view clearly and with valid arguments.
  6. Any inside information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and will not be used for personal gain.
  7. Reviewers should not evaluate manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest.

 

Korpus 21 uses software to detect plagiarism in the contributions it receives.

 

 

 

Publication Frequency

Korpus 21 is a quarterly publication (January-April, May-August and September-December). The reception of manuscripts is open throughout the year. Register or log in and review the Submissions section before submitting your manuscript.

Digital Preservation Policy

Korpus 21 preserves all the documents published digitally in the Scientific Outreach Unit of El Colegio Mexiquense, A.C. Its webpage and all its contents are supported and protected by the Information and Communication Technologies Unit of El Colegio. In turn, the Fernando Rosenzweig Center for Documentary and Information Resources allows access to the texts published in the journal, while creating a digital repository that will allow, among other things, the long-term preservation of the documents published by the magazine and its future transfer to different digital formats when necessary.

Open access policy

Korpus 21 provides immediate open access, whose content can be consulted immediately, free of charge. Based on international standards for open access publications, anyone is authorized to copy, distribute and publicly communicate any of the published texts, as long as the source is properly cited and reference is made to the original publication. Authors are free to disseminate their work and make it available in other places (for example, repositories, personal web pages, or anthologies), giving credit to the original publication and providing a direct link to it.

Anti-plagiarism policy

The authors of the manuscripts are entirely responsible for the content of their contributions, as well as for guaranteeing that they are original and unpublished. As a policy for the prevention of plagiarism, Korpus 21 reserves the right to review, through the use of specialized anti- plagiarism software, all manuscripts sent for publication, using the usual criteria to detect such practices. A basic guide on the most common plagiarism practices can be found at http://publicationethics.org/search/site/plagiarism

In case of detecting plagiarism, the manuscript will be discarded. The Editorial Committee will review the case and, depending on its seriousness, will determine a sanction.

Section Policies

  1. Theme: central theme of the issue. In this section, editors may expressly request the collaboration of some authors, without this implying exemption from the full editorial process.
  2. General: open to any topic included in the different areas covered by the journal.
  3. Readings and rereadings : These are reviews of recent books or those that lend themselves to new readings or interpretations.
  4. Infographics: these order and reorder data that need systematized schemes and diagrams to facilitate a better understanding of a given social fact.

Privacy statement

The names and e-mail addresses entered in Korpus 21 will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this magazine and will not be made available for any other purpose or person.

Funding

Access to all of the journal's content is free and non-commercial, with no fees for readers or authors, so there is no fee to publish an article in the journal. Korpus 21 is financed by public funds administered by El Colegio Mexiquense, A.C.