Editorial Process

All editorial processes carried out by Global Media Journal Mexico operate through the Open Journal System platform. The editors and technical commissioners are responsible for the direct communication with the authors. The author will receive, from the publisher, the reports and answers issued in the review process

GMJM will receive articles for evaluation. For this, a blind arbitration protocol is used, in which the authors do not know who evaluates them and the referees do not know who they evaluate. The process is summarized in the following steps:

1. Reception of the Article
The technical commission retrieves the manuscript in order to ensure that the file has the anonymity necessary to be sent to the Editorial Committee.

2. Editorial Review 
The text is evaluated by the Editorial Committee, which determines if it meets the requirements of originality, thematic relevance and form, in order to resolve if it is feasible to be sent for evaluation. This first evaluation is carried out according to the general policies and author guidelines published in this site.

Once the Editorial Committee considers that the work is feasible, it goes forward to the next stage. Otherwise, the author will receive a denial notice based on the committee's decision.

3. Double-Blind Arbitration
Once the committee has resolved favorably, the manuscript goes into a "blind" evaluation. Under this condition, the anonymity of the evaluating peers and the authors of the articles is guaranteed. Under no circumstances, no one outside of the editors and technical commissioners will know, either the author or the evaluating peers, who participates in the evaluation.

The manuscript will be evaluated by two academic experts from prestigious universities specialized in the line of work to be reviewed. The selection will be made based on the suggestions of the Team and the Editorial Committee and with the help of the defined portfolio of referees, which consists by more than 95% external reviewers from our institutions. In case of discrepancy in the result, a third evaluator will be used. The result will be unappealable.

4. Review Results
Each one of the reviewers will select one of three types of results, which can be:

• Accepted: the manuscript goes to the editing stage without any modifications.

• Publishable with modifications:  within 14 natural days, the author must make the modifications dictated by the reviewers or provide arguments on the reasons not to do so. The editorial team will decide if the observations were followed for acceptance and, in case of any doubt, the opinion of the evaluators may be requested again.

• Declined: the decision is notified to the author. This decision is unappealable.

The editor’s final decision will be made according to the following results combinations:

A second review round can take place by the original reviewers when
a) the editorial committee is in doubt about whether the changes made by the author were sufficient;
b) one or more reviewer had expressed to the editor the need to re-evaluate the text after the changes.

In this case, the submission status will change to “Resubmit for review”. Those reviewer whose decision were “accepted” or “declined” in the first round will not participate in this new stage. The review form in this new evaluation will only include one question regarding whether or not the recommendations were followed and two decision options: “accepted” or “declined”. One declined decision in the second round is cause to reject the submission

The evaluation process will be about 8 to 12 weeks (2 to 3 months) from the reception date.

5. Edition
Once the article has been accepted, the editor will send the manuscript to copyedit to review style and the correct use of the APA guidelines (7th edition). In this stage, the editor might ask the author for missing information when the copyeditor requires it.

Later, in the month of January and July, the editorial team reunites to layout the issue. After that, the authors will receive an email with the article as it would appear once published, so they can make their last observations and give their approval to publish the issue.

Finally, the authors form the accepted articles, along with the reviewers from accepted and rejected articles will be informed about the publication of the new issue.