The Journal DIÁLOGO DE SABERES (DIALOGUE OF KNOWLEDGES) pretends to be a dissemination organ to the Social Legal Research Centre of the faculty of Law from Universidad Libre de Bogotá. It will be published in print and digital format. It is recognized as a Scientific Specialized National Journal by Colciencias and included and indexed in the National Bibliographical Index (Publindex).
It is published twice a year, including articles in Spanish, Italian, English, French and Portuguese that are normally the result of completed investigations of national and foreign authors, in the areas of Law and Social Sciences knowledge.
Articles for publication should be result of completed and unpublished research, and not being sent simultaneously to other journals. The publishable works must correspond to the classification of: (i) articles of scientific and technological research (ii) articles of reflection or (iii) articles of review, according to the definition of each of these typologies made by Publindex:
1) Scientific and technological research Article. A document that presents, in detail, the original results of completed research projects. The structure generally used contains four important elements: introduction, methodology, results and conclusions.
2) Reflection Article. A document that presents the results of completed research from an analytical, interpretative or critical perspective of the author, using primary sources.
3) Review Article. A document that is a result of a completed research where published or unpublished investigations are analyzed, systematized and integrated, in a field of science or technology, in order to give an account of the advances and development trends. It is characterized by presenting a careful bibliographical review of at least 50 references. (Publindex, 2010)
Each Article will be sent to one (1) referees for evaluation outside the Universidad Libre, using the double blind system (omitting the name of the author or authors).
Its target recipients are students, teachers, researchers and academic communities interested in central thematic problematic shafts of its specialty. Its purpose is contributing not only to the scientific diagnosis of legal and social problems, but as well to the search of fair and democratic solutions.
DIALOGOS SABERES (Dialogues of knowledge) is directed under philosophies according to which investigations that are going to have social impact, should be reported and appropriated by its recipients. This means that it adheres to the postulates and axioms of Budapest, Berlin, and Bethesda statements, being considered in consequence an open access Journal.
Thus the disclosure organ is recognized and included in Indexing and Overview services (SIRES) with selection committees of Latindex, Ebsco Academic Search Complete, The Left Index and located in the databases of Dialnet of the Universidad de la Rioja (Spain) and is available online: www.unilibre.edu.co/bogota/investigacion/revistadialogos-de-saberes
The evaluation of the postulated articles for publication in the Journal consists of four moments: (1) reception; (2) initial assessment; (3) evaluation of academic peer and (4) final selection for publication.
- Reception: starts with the shipping of the manuscripts from the authors attending the call application. The texts shall be sent to the given publication electronic email. Along with the material, the assignment of rights and the originality statement must be send; the presented texts must be unpublished, original, not have been subjected to an arbitration process in another publication.
- Initial evaluation: implies review and evaluation from the members of the publishing Committee and the Editor, in this first evaluation the relevance of the document and the compliance of the editorial guidelines are expressed.
- Evaluation of academic peers: each item that obtains a favorable concept (pro) in the initial evaluation will be forwarded to one (1) external academic peer reviewers, so that they can render a concept about them. In addition, peers will not have knowledge of the author or authors being evaluated (double-blind method). At least 60% of the arbitrators employed in each issue of the Journal will be external to Universidad Libre.
3.1. Concepts emitted by the peer reviewers of the examined articles can generate as a result: (a) approved; (b) approved with modifications; (c) rejected.
3.2. The items that the referee must qualify to offer the evaluation concept are the ones disposed (presented) to that goal in the evaluation instrument given by the Scientific and Publishing Committee of the Journal. The mentioned items will have a rating on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 is the minimum level of quality or compliance and 10 total compliance and quality.
- Peers Evaluation may be consulted by the author of the text at any moment.
- If the result is approved with substantial and considerable alterations, the text must return to the evaluator peer that gave the concept, so that final approval could be given.
- The corrections must be made within a period of ten (10) days, counted from the next following day the referral gave the original concept. Past this period, if there isn´t received information, it´ll mean that the item has been withdrawn from the process by the author. In case of considering it convenient, the author may request that the publishing of text for the next Edition in order to establish a greater period of time to make the modifications, which will be determined and communicated by the Editor.
- Selection of peers is carried out according to the levels of study, recent publications and thematic specialty, in accordance with the data bank that the Journal holds for this purpose.
- Selected peers, once they know entrusted item to evaluation, must demonstrate the existence of interest conflicts that could prevent their objective evaluation. It´s up to the Journal Editorial Committee to decide definitively on peers impartiality.
The circumstances that may result in Declaration of interest conflicts may be among others:
-The existence of kinship, affinity or civilians ties with the author
- Enmity against the author.
- Having known as evaluator, director or tutor the results of the investigation result.
- With the acceptance of the order, the arbitrators are committed to maintaining total confidentiality regarding the data that may result known under his work as evaluators. By the previous expressed and according to the publications ethics Committee, reviewers cannot make use of the arguments, data or any another discovery contained in the articles until they are not published, always observing and retaining the respect by the regulations on author rights.
- Peer evaluators that in exercise of its commissioned task, know, detect or recognize a possible plagiarism must put it into knowledge of the Editor, so that they shall take the actions in accordance with the authors rules.