Material submitted for publication will be initially evaluated by the editorial secretary to ensure compliance with the formal requirements for publication (see below). Subsequently, and with the sole exception of the Editorial Articles and Bibliographical Comments, all material will be submitted for evaluation by two external arbitrators to be designated by the Editorial Committee. Communication between the Secretariat area of the Journal and the Editorial Committee and between both and the authors will be mainly by e-mail.

The most relevant aspects in the evaluation of the manuscript by the reviewers are contained in the "Review Form". This form specifies the guidelines for the review process, assuring the anonymity of the reviewers and the author's rights with the commitment to destroy the material once the evaluation process is concluded. Likewise, this form contains an indication of the existence of any conflict of interest that would oblige the reviewer to exclude him/herself from the evaluation. The justification of the reviewer's decision should be recorded in the form, pointing out the strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript, and anonymous suggestions about its content can be made in the form of comments to the author(s) and to the Journal’s editor.

If the evaluations of the reviewers are not in agreement, the Editorial Committee may decide to send the manuscript to a third reviewer.

The Editorial Committee, in considering the evaluations of the reviewers, reserves the right to accept or reject the contributions received and, if accepted, the order of publication and the section where they will be published. In addition, the Editorial Committee may suggest any style corrections it deems necessary. The acceptance or rejection of the material sent for publication and its date of publication will be promptly informed to the responsible author by e-mail.