Revista CIDOB d'Afers Internacionals. Peer review process

Revista CIDOB d'Afers Internacionals

All articles published in the Revista CIDOB d’Afers Internacionals — if they pass an initial screening by the Editorial Board and a check using the automatic plagiarism detection tool Viper — go through a double-blind external peer review process.

The editors are responsible for selecting and inviting reviewers, who will receive the ethical guidelines, the evaluation protocol, and the anonymized article to be reviewed. Each paper is evaluated by two reviewers who will issue a verdict from the following four options:

  1. Accepted
  2. Accepted with minor changes
  3. Accepted with major changes (the revised version must be re-reviewed
  4. Rejected (the article cannot be resubmitted)

In case of disagreement, the Editorial Board may send the text to a third reviewer and/or, ultimately, make a final decision on publication together with the issue coordinator – if the text is part of a special issue.

If, after peer review, publication is conditional on changes – whether minor or major – the editors will inform the authors of the required changes and the timeframe to implement them. Depending on the nature of the changes, either the reviewers or the Editorial Board will decide whether the revised text is suitable for publication.

The editors are responsible for ensuring anonymity during the process. Prior to the start of the review process, the Editorial Board may reject a manuscript without peer review if it does not meet formal requirements, solely due to the quality of its academic content, or because it does not align with the journal’s editorial themes. Authors may also be asked to make revisions before the peer review process begins.

An attempt will be made to notify a response within 5 to 6 weeks.

The estimated time from article submission to publication is approximately 6 months.

Currently, the journal's rejection rate is around 70%.

For more information on the responsibilities of authors, reviewers, and editors regarding the peer review process, see the Ethical Code and Statement of Good Practices.