Submissions

Aims and Scope | Peer Review Process | Guidelines for Reviewers | Copyright and Licensing | Publication Ethics and Editorial Best Practices | Plagiarism Policy | Manuscript Submission Guidelines | Style and Citation Guidelines | Evaluation Criteria

> AIMS AND SCOPE

Please read carefully the aims, scope, and organization of Políticas de la Memoria in About the Journal.

Políticas de la Memoria publishes works that contribute to the study and discussion of current debates on:

• Intellectual history and the history of ideas.
• Left-wing traditions and social movements in Argentina and throughout the world.
• Critical and emancipatory theories.
• Archival policies and the preservation and representation of collective memory.

> PEER REVIEW PROCESS

The journal does not charge authors any fees for the evaluation or publication of articles. Submissions are first assessed by the Editorial Committee and, in a second stage, by two external reviewers under a double-blind peer-review system. Políticas de la Memoria uses anonymous double-blind peer review; therefore, the identity of the author or authors must not be made explicit in the submitted manuscript, whether on the title page, in the title, notes, or bibliography. Submissions must be written in Spanish and must not have been previously published. No additions or modifications will be accepted once a contribution has received final approval from the Editorial Committee.

• All submissions must be made through the OJS submission system, following the instructions provided by the platform.
• Submissions are first evaluated by the Editorial Committee and then by two external reviewers under a double-blind peer-review system.
• In the event of substantial disagreement between the first two reviews, the Editorial Committee may request a third external review, which will be considered together with the other reports when making the final decision.
• The final editorial decision to accept, request revisions, or reject a submission rests with the Editorial Committee of Políticas de la Memoria, which makes its decision on the basis of the reviewers’ reports.
• The approximate duration of the review process is between two and five months. If an article is accepted, authors may immediately request a certificate stating that the article will be published in the journal’s next annual issue, which is released in November.
• The status of the review process can be followed through the author’s account on the journal’s online platform, or inquiries may be sent directly to politicasdelamemoria@cedinci.org.

> GUIDELINES FOR REVIEWERS

• Please use the following review form: External review form for Políticas de la Memoria. Download.
• If reviewers make comments or annotations directly on the manuscript, they must ensure that these are made anonymously and that no identifying information remains in the file metadata or word-processing software.

> COPYRIGHT AND LICENSING

In order to make published works more accessible to researchers and to facilitate the global exchange of knowledge, Políticas de la Memoria provides open access to all its content.

Authors who publish in the journal agree to the following terms:

• Authors retain copyright and grant Políticas de la Memoria the right of first publication and a non-exclusive license to publish and disseminate the work.

• Unless otherwise expressly indicated, content published by the journal is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) . This license permits copying and redistribution of the material in any medium or format, provided that appropriate credit is given to the authors and to the work’s first publication in Políticas de la Memoria, the material is not used for commercial purposes, and modified versions of the work are not distributed.

• The journal does not charge submission, peer-review, article-processing, or publication fees.

> PUBLICATION ETHICS AND EDITORIAL BEST PRACTICES

Políticas de la Memoria and its publishing institution, CeDInCI, adhere to the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing and to the international standards issued by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) .

In order to ensure transparency both in the publication of contributions and in procedures for resolving related conflicts, the journal also follows the editorial best-practice guidelines and resources developed by COPE.

The journal’s Editorial Team is committed to ensuring that all parties involved —editors, peer reviewers, and authors— follow ethical standards and best practices throughout the editorial process.

The journal’s code of conduct, ethical standards, and procedures for handling disputes and misconduct can be consulted in full at this link.

> PLAGIARISM POLICY

Submissions must be original and must not involve any form of plagiarism. Prior to peer review, the journal checks submitted manuscripts using the plagiarism-detection tools iThenticate and Duplichecker. If plagiarism is detected, the manuscript will be rejected immediately and the corresponding evidence will be provided to the submitting author. The author may submit any explanations they consider appropriate; however, the journal reserves the right to reject the submission definitively after reviewing and responding to those explanations.

A) MANUSCRIPT SUBMISSION GUIDELINES

• Original manuscripts must be submitted electronically through the journal’s online submission platform .
• The submission must also include the signed originality statement completed by the author or authors.
• The first page of the manuscript must include the title and the full name of the author or authors.
• Information concerning the work —acknowledgements, references to previous versions, etc.— must be provided in a footnote placed after the first sentence of the article.
• The author’s institutional affiliation must be indicated by an asterisk after the name, referring to a footnote. The footnote must include the author’s complete institutional affiliation and, where applicable, a link to their ORCID.
• The final page of the manuscript must include an abstract in Spanish and another in English, each between 120 and 150 words, followed by three to five keywords in Spanish and English.
• Articles should be approximately 20,000 to 50,000 characters including spaces.
• CeDInCI is a non-profit organization, and its journal does not charge authors under any circumstances for the review or publication of articles.

B) STYLE AND CITATION GUIDELINES

1. Guidelines for formatting the main text

1.1. Use of bold, italics, and underlining

Bold type should be used only for titles of books or periodicals (Clarín, Ficciones, El Capital) and to indicate the beginning of a new section or subsection.

Italics should be used only to emphasize concepts and for foreign-language expressions (tertium datur).

Do not use underlining.

1.2. Punctuation, enumeration, and symbols

• Use typographic quotation marks: “xxx” (not "xxx"). For quotations within quotations, use single quotation marks: “xxx ‘xxx’ xxx”. Do not use angle quotation marks: «xxx».
• Use a hyphen for compound words: political-social.
• Use an em dash for parenthetical phrases: —xxx—.
• For Spanish ordinals, use forms such as 1.º and 2.ª.

1.3. Indentation, spacing, font size, and typeface

• Typeface: Times New Roman.
• Font size: 12 points.
• Line spacing: 1.5.
• Do not insert additional spacing between paragraphs.
• Do not indent the beginning of paragraphs.
• Titles and subtitles must be set in bold.

1.4. General structure of manuscripts

Manuscripts must include the author or authors, institutional affiliation, email address, title, and subtitle, if applicable.

The bibliography cited and/or used in the development of the work must appear at the end of the manuscript. It must be followed by an abstract in Spanish accompanied by three to five keywords. The abstract must also be provided in English together with corresponding keywords.

If the manuscript includes images, they must be submitted separately in a folder and must not be embedded in the body of the manuscript. Authors should indicate the intended location using a note such as “insert figure 1 here”. Authors are responsible for providing appropriate captions and identifying information for all images or photographs.

If the manuscript includes tables or graphs, these must also be submitted separately and must not be embedded in the body of the manuscript. Authors should indicate their intended location using a note such as “insert table no. 1 here”. Authors must also provide an appropriate title and identifying information for each table or graph.

Avoid automatic numbering and bullet-list functions in word-processing software such as Microsoft Word.

2. Citation guidelines

Note-citation system: references must be numbered consecutively in the main text and provided in footnotes. Footnote markers must be placed after the relevant punctuation mark. References should not be inserted in the middle of a sentence but rather at its end, after punctuation such as a period, comma, or semicolon.

2.1. Abbreviations

Cfr.: means “compare” or “consult” and indicates that another text or passage should be consulted.

Ibidem, ib., or ibid.: used to indicate that the work cited is the same as in the immediately preceding note. In this case, the full bibliographic reference is not repeated, although the relevant page number must always be provided. Example: Ibidem, p. 4.

cit.: abbreviation used to indicate that a work has already been cited in a previous footnote, though not in the immediately preceding one. In such cases, the author’s name must be provided.

2.2. Bibliographic references in footnotes

The following specifications indicate the required order, typography, and punctuation for each type of reference.

Books: author’s first and last name, title, place of publication, publisher, date of publication, volume or tome, and page number when necessary. In footnotes, authors’ names must appear with first name followed by surname.
Example: Enzo Traverso, La historia como campo de batalla, Buenos Aires, Fondo de Cultura Económica, 2012, p. 22.

Journal articles: author’s first and last name, “title of the article”, name of the journal, publisher, volume, issue, tome, publication date, and pages of the cited article.
Example: Flavio Rapisardi, “Escritura y lucha política en la cultura argentina: identidades y hegemonía en el movimiento de diversidades sexuales entre 1970 y 2000”, in Revista Iberoamericana, vol. LXXIV, no. 225, October-December 2008, p. 979.

Newspaper articles: author’s first and last name, “title of the article”, name of the newspaper, place of publication, date, and page number.
Example: Marta Dillon, “La huella de un pionero”, in Página/12, Buenos Aires, November 24, 2013, p. 32.

Book chapters: author’s first and last name, “title of the chapter”, first and last name of the editor or compiler, title of the book, publisher, place of publication, tome, volume, publication date, and pages of the chapter.
Example: Jean-Ives Mollier, “Grandes momentos do Livro Político na França”, in Marisa Midori Deaecto and Jean-Ives Mollier (eds.), Edição e Revolução. Leituras comunistas no Brasil e na França, Atelie Editorial and Editora UFMG, Cotia and Belo Horizonte, 2013, pp. 249-266.

Journal or newspaper articles available online: author’s first and last name, “title of the article”, name of the journal or newspaper, year, and URL.
Example: Antonio Negri, “Egemonia: Gramsci, Togliatti, Laclau”, in EuroNomade, 2015. Available at www.euronomade.info/?p=4956 .

Conference papers and proceedings: author’s first and last name, “title of the paper”, name of the conference or academic meeting, city, organizing institution, and year.
Example: Isabel Wschebor, “Del folletín al radioteatro: dos tránsitos en la modernización cultural”, paper presented at the Cuarto Congreso de Docentes e Investigadores del MERCOSUR, Montevideo, UCU, 2001.

Correspondence: author’s first and last name, recipient’s first and last name, date, name of the archival collection, and institution.
Example: Letter from Victoria Ocampo to Samuel Glusberg, undated, c. 1929, Fondo Glusberg, CeDInCI.

Online resources: first and last name, “title of the video”, YouTube video, duration, publication date, and URL.
Example: François Dosse, “La saga des intellectuels français 1944-1989”, YouTube video, 0:07:02, published on October 28, 2018, available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0y3bsxYs2IA .

Blog posts: first and last name, “title of the post”, title of the blog, date of publication, and URL.
Example: Korine Amacher, “Les historiens de la Russie et le passé stalinien”, in Comité de Vigilance face aux Usages publics de l’Histoire, January 23, 2009, available at http://cvuh.blogspot.com/2009/01/les-historiens-de-la-russie-face-au.html .

Interviews conducted by the authors: when an interview conducted by the author is cited in the main text or in a footnote, indicate, for example: “Interview conducted by the author on 21/08/2015”. The interview must also be included in the final bibliography.

2.3. Final bibliography

The bibliography must be listed again at the end of the manuscript following the same citation rules described above, with one difference: authors must be listed alphabetically by surname.
Example: Traverso, Enzo, La historia como campo de batalla, Buenos Aires, Fondo de Cultura Económica, 2012.

C) EVALUATION CRITERIA

The blind review of manuscripts carried out by reviewers external to the Editorial Committee follows the criteria listed below:

[1] RELEVANCE AND ORIGINALITY

Reviewers assess whether the subject area of the article is appropriate to the journal’s editorial scope. If the manuscript does not fit these editorial guidelines, it should not be recommended for publication.

[2] COMMAND OF THE SUBJECT AND REFERENCES

Reviewers assess the relevance, appropriateness, and currency of the bibliography used, as well as the author’s general knowledge of the state of the field. The assessment follows the categories good, fair, or poor. If the bibliography is considered inappropriate or outdated, reviewers may identify important works that should be taken into account.

[3] COHERENCE AND CLARITY

1. The clarity of the article is evaluated in terms of readability and style as good, fair, or poor.
2. Reviewers assess the coherence of the article by considering whether its objectives and hypotheses are clearly defined and whether the author fulfills the stated aims. This evaluation also follows the categories good, fair, or poor.
3. Reviewers examine whether the article provides a clear conclusion summarizing its principal contribution. If not, the reviewer may request that the existing conclusion be expanded or that a conclusion be added.
4. Reviewers assess whether the article includes critical reflection on the subject addressed or on the authors and works it discusses.
5. Formal aspects of the manuscript —style, syntax, length, and overall structure— are rated as good, fair, or poor.

[4] TITLE AND ABSTRACT

1. Reviewers assess whether the title is appropriate and clearly and accurately reflects the subject of the article. If not, the reviewer may suggest an alternative title.
2. Reviewers assess whether the abstract is correctly written. If not, the reviewer should identify the most important errors or problems.

[5] REVISION

The reviewer may suggest or request the rewriting of specific passages or paragraphs when necessary. In such cases, the reviewer should clearly indicate the changes, additions, or corrections that the author is expected to make.

[6] TABLES AND IMAGES

If the manuscript contains tables, images, or figures, reviewers assess whether they are clear and necessary. If not, reviewers should provide appropriate recommendations.

[7] FINAL RECOMMENDATION

Reviewers provide a final recommendation according to the following categories:

• UNCONDITIONAL ACCEPTANCE. The manuscript is suitable for publication as submitted, without corrections or additions, except for possible minor stylistic or editorial changes.
• ACCEPTANCE WITH COMMENTS. Publication is recommended, but a limited number of modifications to specific passages or paragraphs are suggested. The revised version, if submitted, will be returned to the same reviewer.
• CONDITIONAL ACCEPTANCE. Publication depends on the completion of a specific number of substantial revisions considered essential. The revised version, if submitted, will undergo a new round of peer review.
• REJECTION. Publication is not recommended, even with substantial revisions, because the manuscript requires a complete reformulation.

[8] REVIEWER COMMENTS TO THE EDITORS (OPTIONAL)

Reviewers may send the editors any additional comments concerning the manuscript that they consider relevant.

↑ Back to top