Salesianum evaluates submitted contributions through a double-blind peer review process to ensure the scientific quality of publications and to help authors further refine their work.
Reviewers collaborating with Salesianum adhere to the Journal's Code of Ethics, committing to observe it in all aspects relevant to their role.
In particular, reviewers who accept an assignment commit to completing it within the agreed timeframe with the Editorial Team (usually within 30 days of receiving the submission) and to maintain complete confidentiality regarding the manuscripts under review, which must not be used for personal purposes. All reviewed manuscripts are considered confidential documents.
Reviewers who identify a potential conflict of interest that prevents them from providing an impartial evaluation, or who realize they are unable to fulfill their assignment, will promptly inform the Editorial Director.
The Editorial Team guarantees full confidentiality for reviewers, never disclosing their identity to the author, even after publication.
The peer review service for Salesianum does not include financial compensation. However, the Editorial Team can provide a certificate of review if requested.
Criteria for Scientific Evaluation of Submissions
Reviewers will evaluate submissions objectively, adequately explaining their judgments and suggestions, based solely on the scientific quality of the work, including:
- originality of the study
- depth of analysis on the investigated topic
- rigorous argumentation and consistency of discussion
- clarity and consistency of the stated objectives and conclusions
- integration into the scientific debate on the topic
- accuracy and currency of bibliographic references
- clarity and fluidity of exposition
Outcome of the Review
Reviewers' evaluations may conclude with the following outcomes:
- Publishable without significant comments, or with minor corrections
- Publishable with Conditions, subject to the explicit revisions requested by reviewers
- Not Publishable as it does not meet the Journal's standards
Reviewers may include additional comments or suggestions for improving the text, which will be passed on anonymously to the author of the submission.
The form sent to reviewers can be consulted here.
