Peer Review Process

  1. Phainomenon publishes original academic research articles. Exceptionally, and for reasons of scientific interest and/or the publication of revelant contributions, the Editors may decide to publish and/or translate a previously published text.
  2. Once a text is received, the Editors verify if it complies with all the formal requirements. Formatting or presentation errors, failure to comply with the journal’s standards, and spelling or syntactic errors may be a cause for the rejection of works. Articles dealing with themes that are out of the editorial scope of the journal will be rejected too.
  3. After the reception being confirmed, the evaluation process begins. In a first phase, the Editors make a general review of the quality and thematic adequacy of the text.
  4. Articles that pass this first filtering process are sent to two external experts for evaluation, in accordance with the double-blind referring procedure. The reviewers shall evaluate whether
    (i) the article demonstrates sufficient knowledge of the subject in question,
    (ii) proposes a thesis of interest,
    (iii) the thesis is well argued and substantiated,
    (iv) makes an original contribution to the subject matter and/or the state of the art,
    (v) the author has full knowledge of the bibliography on the subject,
    (vi) the article is properly written.
    If there is any discrepancy between the evaluations, or if considered necessary for any supervening motive, the Editors may submit the text to a third referee.
  5. In accordance with the referee’s reports, the Editors shall communicate to the author that the article falls under one of the following situations:
    - Publishable as it is
    - Publishable with modifications (In this case, publication will be conditional to the author making all of the changes required by the Editors.)
    - Not publishable
  6. If a contribution is accepted for publication, the author must check the galley-proofs within a maximum period of two weeks.