All manuscripts submitted to infoANALÍTICA undergo an initial editorial review to verify their thematic relevance, originality, academic quality, and compliance with the journal’s guidelines. Manuscripts that pass this stage are evaluated through a double-blind peer review process, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers remain anonymous.

Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two external experts with experience in the relevant subject area. Reviewers assess the manuscript’s originality, scientific relevance, methodological rigor, clarity, coherence, quality of the results, and contribution to knowledge.

Reviewers may recommend one of the following decisions:

• Accept the manuscript.
• Accept with minor revisions.
• Request major revisions and a new evaluation.
• Reject the manuscript.

When the reviewers’ recommendations differ substantially, the Editorial Board may request an evaluation from a third reviewer. The final decision regarding acceptance or rejection rests with the Editor-in-Chief, based on the reviewers’ reports, the authors’ responses, and compliance with the journal’s editorial policies.

Authors must respond clearly and thoroughly to the reviewers’ comments and submit a revised version within the established deadline. Acceptance of the manuscript is subject to the satisfactory incorporation of the requested changes.

Reviewers must maintain confidentiality, impartiality, and adherence to the ethical principles of scholarly publishing. They must also disclose any potential conflicts of interest and refrain from using or disclosing information contained in the manuscripts under review.