Editorial policy

The editorial policy of Transformación guarantees the quality, transparency, and integrity of the evaluation and publication processes, in accordance with the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the good practices of scientific editing.

Editorial process

The editorial process consists of the following stages, with their responsible actors and estimated durations:

Stage	Responsible actor	Estimated duration
Reception	OJS System	Automatic
Initial editorial review (pre-check)	Editor	15 business days
Reviewer assignment	Editor	7 business days
Peer review	2 external reviewers	30 business days
Successive rounds (if applicable)	Authors, reviewers, editors	Variable (up to 30 additional business days)
Editorial decision	Director or Editor-in-Chief	10 business days
Layout	Editorial production team	15 business days
Publication	Editorial production team	Up to 6 months from acceptance

Details of each stage

1. Reception: The author submits the manuscript through the OJS platform, together with the Letter of originality and publication license. The system automatically records the date of receipt.

2. Initial editorial review (pre-check): An editor verifies thematic suitability, compliance with formal requirements (template, length, format), quality of writing, originality (using Turnitin), currency of the bibliography, and presentation of all required documents. This evaluation is carried out according to the editorial compliance model available at: https://transformacion.reduc.edu.cu/modelo_de_cumplimiento_de_normas_editoriales.docx. Possible outcomes: accepted for peer review, returned for corrections, or rejected. Manuscripts that do not pass this phase will be archived on the platform.

3. Reviewer assignment: The editor identifies and contacts two reviewers specialized in the topic, verifying their availability and absence of conflicts of interest.

4. Peer review: Two external reviewers evaluate the manuscript according to the criteria established in the peer reviewer model (available at: https://transformacion.reduc.edu.cu/modelo_del_revisor_por_pares.docx). Possible outcomes: accept without changes, accept with minor changes, reconsider after substantial changes, or reject.

5. Successive rounds: If the manuscript requires modifications, the authors submit the revised version. The editor may send it back to the reviewers to verify the changes. At this stage, with the explicit agreement of authors and reviewers, an open peer review modality may be chosen in these iterations. If either party does not consent, anonymity is maintained.

6. Editorial decision: The Director or Editor-in-Chief analyzes the reports and makes the final decision, which is communicated to the authors with a detailed explanation. In case of disagreement between the two reviewers, a third evaluation may be requested. Against a rejection decision, authors have ten business days to submit a reasoned reply to the Editorial Board, which will resolve within a maximum of fifteen days with a final decision.

7. Layout: Style correction, layout, diagramming, and metadata assignment.

8. Publication: The article is published in OJS with its publication date and all necessary metadata for visibility and indexing.

Peer review

• Type of review: Double-blind peer review as the standard modality. Additionally, with explicit agreement, open review may be chosen in successive rounds.
• Number of reviewers: Two, experts of recognized prestige in the national and international scientific community.
• Reviewer selection criteria: Accredited expertise in the topic, scientific production in the area, institutional affiliation (prioritizing geographic and institutional diversity), availability. External reviewers are privileged, and when possible, from foreign institutions.
• Evaluation criteria: Originality and novelty of the contribution, methodological rigor, relevance and currency of the theoretical and bibliographic foundation, clarity and quality of exposition, significance of results and conclusions, and adherence to editorial standards.
• Confidentiality: Reviewers commit to maintaining the confidentiality of assigned manuscripts and not using the knowledge contained therein before publication.

Publication frequency

Continuous publication, organized in an annual volume, opening in January and closing in December.

Digital preservation policy

Contents are preserved long-term through the PKP Preservation Network (PKP PN) and LOCKSS systems, guaranteeing their accessibility and permanence over time, even in the event of cessation of publication.

Open science and supplementary data policy

In line with SciELO guidelines, the journal requests:

• Indicate in the references section (or in a note) the repositories where research data not fully included in the article are hosted, as well as links to preprint versions.
• Authors may upload to the platform, as supplementary files, datasets, instruments, protocols, or additional materials, provided they respect confidentiality and intellectual property rights.

Corrections and retractions policy

Transformación is committed to maintaining the integrity of the scientific record. If significant errors are detected in an already published article (that do not constitute scientific misconduct), an erratum will be published, which will be linked to the original article. In cases of serious scientific misconduct (plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, duplicate publication, inappropriate authorship), retraction of the article will be managed, following the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The retraction notice will be published transparently, linked to the original article, notified to the databases where the journal is indexed, and reported to the authors' affiliated institutions.

Non-discrimination policy

The editorial team guarantees that all editorial decisions are based exclusively on the academic and scientific merit of the manuscripts. In no case will they be affected by the origin of the authors, their nationality, ethnicity, political beliefs, religion, gender identity, or sexual orientation.

Authorship changes policy

Requests for changes in the author list after submission (addition, removal, or reordering) must be justified in writing and approved by all signing authors, following COPE guidelines. The editor will evaluate the request and may approve or reject it according to their criteria and the justification presented.