Peer Review Process

PSM Review is committed to preserving the integrity of peer review and maintaining the highest standards of evaluation. The process of reviewing and publishing articles consists of three stages.

First, the Editor-in-Chief analyzes the article to verify that it meets the basic requirements of scientific relevance, theoretical/methodological contribution, and originality, in addition to assessing the quality of the text and bibliographic references (Desk Review). Compatibility with the scope and focus of PSM Review is also evaluated. Articles that do not meet these requirements or do not meet the technical characteristics required by the journal are rejected by the editors. The duration of this stage is usually 20 days, varying according to demand.

Then, the approved articles are sent to specialized reviewers selected by the journal (Double-Blind Review). Reviewers are chosen based on their areas of expertise and are asked to complete the assessment within 20 days. The anonymity of both authors and reviewers is maintained.

In the third stage, if the article is approved by the reviewers, the Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision on publication. In case of a negative opinion by the two evaluators, the article is automatically rejected. In some cases, the evaluation of a third reviewer may be necessary, especially in situations of conflict between the evaluations of the first two reviewers. In this case, the evaluation by the third reviewer must be completed within 20 days.

Evaluations are conducted using forms that include space for comments, which are forwarded to the author(s) if conditional acceptance, corrections, or rejection is recommended.

If mandatory corrections are necessary, the author is requested to complete them within a maximum period of 30 days. The new version of the article is then sent back to the reviewers for review.

A second round of corrections may be undertaken before the article is ultimately accepted. Nevertheless, if the corrections are not implemented satisfactorily, it may lead to the rejection of the article.