Author Guidelines
The Latin American Journal of Social Sciences - Relacis, edited by Grupo JJ San Marcos (Peru), is a peer-reviewed publication, published biannually. It publishes unpublished documents, especially research articles (qualitative and/or quantitative research, as well as conceptual reflections), essays, bibliographic reviews, letters to the editor and interviews.
Before making a submission, it is recommended to review the submission checklist: https://revistas.jjsanmarcos.org/index.php/relacis/about/submissions
Formal rules for submitting work
All papers must be submitted through the journal's OJS system: submit an article . The citation system of APA Standards 7, seventh edition must be used and must be sent in format (. doc or . docx ) with the following formal characteristics:
- Letter sheet type.
- Line spacing 1.5
- Letter: Garamond / Times New Roman
- Margins 2.54 cm.
Suggested length for works without including summary page and references:
Investigation article
- Minimum 8 pages
- Maximum 25 pages
Review article
- Minimum 8 pages
- Maximum 25 pages
essays
- Minimum 8 pages
- Maximum 25 pages
Bibliographic review
- Minimum 3 pages
- Maximum 10 pages
Documents that do not meet these characteristics will be rejected.
In addition to considering the specific criteria for each type of work as mentioned below.
IMPORTANT : All articles, essays and reviews must be submitted following the magazine's templates, so any document that does not follow the rules and the attached template will be automatically rejected.
It should be noted that there should not be any reference to the author in the submitted works.
Author information (Name and surname, institutional affiliation, Country, institutional email and ORCID code) must be sent in a separate document through the OJS. File incorporated in the following section of templates for submitting works, also within this file is the authorship table in case there are two or more authors, so that they specify their type of participation/collaboration in the presented work .
Templates for submitting jobs
- Bibliographic Review Template
General points
In any of the above jobs, you will need to:
- Indicate if there is any conflict of interest to declare.
- Indicate the contribution of authorship if there is more than one author.
- Refer if your work was the product of financing.
This information will be recorded in the Data file of the author and/or authors.
Type of jobs
Investigation article:
A research article aims to present original and unpublished results of research or research progress. It is based on empirical data, has a clear methodology, and a formal structure (Introduction – methodology – results – discussion) and may or may not have a conclusion section.
The structure of the Research Articles is as follows:
- Title (between 15 and 18 words).
- Summary in the original language in which the article is sent (between 150 and 250 words)
- Keywords (minimum 3, maximum 5. They can be compound words)
- Abstract (in English)
- Keywords (in English)
- Introduction
- Methods
- Results
- Discussion
- Conclusions
(Depending on the discipline or if it is a conceptual reflection, subtitles may be added at the author's discretion)
- References
Required extension:
Minimum 12 pages
Maximum 30 pages
Avoid footnotes.
Review article:
A review article aims to synthesize and analyze existing information on a topic. It is based on carrying out an exhaustive review of the literature, carrying out a critical analysis using some technique or method and reaching a general conclusion. It has a clear methodology and a formal structure (Introduction – methodology – results – discussion) and may or may not have a conclusion section.
The structure of the Review Articles is as follows:
- Title (between 15 and 18 words).
- Summary in the original language in which the article is sent (between 150 and 250 words)
- Keywords (minimum 3, maximum 5. They can be compound words)
- Abstract (in English)
- Keywords (in English)
- Introduction
- Materials and methods
- Results
- Discussion/ Conclusions
(Depending on the discipline or if it is a conceptual reflection, subtitles may be added at the author's discretion)
- References
Required extension:
Minimum 12 pages
Maximum 30 pages
Avoid footnotes.
Rehearsal:
An essay aims to express a personal and original interpretation about a specific topic. This is a writing that presents flexibility but even with this characteristic, it must have an argumentative approach, which has theoretical bases as support for its realization. Likewise, it must start from a premise, hypothesis, general question or purpose. It has a clear and consistent methodology, and may have the following structure (Introduction - subtopics - conclusion) and may or may not have the recommendations and suggestions section. Likewise, you may choose to consider the IMRDyC methodology if you consider it pertinent.
The structure of the Essay is as follows:
- Title (between 15 and 18 words).
- Summary in the original language in which the article is sent (between 150 and 250 words)
- Keywords (minimum 3, maximum 5. They can be compound words)
- Abstract (in English)
- Keywords (in English)
- Introduction
- Development - Subtopics
- Conclusions
(Depending on the discipline or if it is a conceptual reflection, subtitles may be added at the author's discretion)
- References
Required extension:
Minimum 10 pages
Maximum 30 pages
Avoid footnotes.
Bibliographic review:
A bibliographic review aims to present the evaluation of a particular work, for which part of the content must be described, a critical analysis of the work must be carried out and an assessment of the contribution of this work to a certain field or area of knowledge must be made. Its structure is the following:
The structure of the Bibliographic Review is as follows:
- Title (no more than 18 words).
- Technical file of the work.
- Presentation.
- Commented synthesis.
- Conclusions.
- References
Required extension:
Minimum 3 pages
Maximum 10 pages
Avoid footnotes.
Work review process
1.- The editor responsible for the issue and the editorial team will review the work, identifying the relevance of the work and compliance with the editorial standards indicated above. Authors whose works do not comply with the established guidelines will be informed and will not proceed to the next phase until the indicated observations are met.
2.- The works that comply with the guidelines established according to point number (1) will begin the review process by blind peers, being experts in their field and not having any knowledge or data of the author or authors of the work.
3.- If the results of at least one review are “Unpublishable”, the author will be notified, providing the work with the pertinent observations, which must be delivered within a specified period for the adjustment of the text. After that, a third reviewer will be summoned who will determine whether the work is publishable or not.
4.- The work with the observations corrected by the author after the review, enters the analysis phase using anti-plagiarism software. The software used for this review is Turnitin . At this point, there must be at least 15% similarity. Finally, if the article has meritorious quality and does not show evidence of plagiarism, it will be accepted for publication in the assigned issue of the journal.
Conditions of anonymity in work
Each author and/or authors will be responsible for sending two files, (1) one; with your data and other necessary information and (2) two; specifically of the work , without including any indication or data of the author or authors. If any work is detected during the review process that does not meet the anonymity criteria according to the indicated specifications, the work will be declared unpublishable.
Evaluation criteria
The results of the evaluations of the submitted works may be the following:
Good: The article meets all requirements and is ready for publication without additional changes.
Fair: The article has merit and can be published, but requires minor corrections or specific adjustments.
Deficient: The article does not meet the required standards or has significant deficiencies that make it unsuitable for publication. Its publication is rejected.
