Guidelines for reviewers

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

Revista Andaluza de Administración Pública employs a double-blind peer-review system, ensuring that neither authors nor reviewers are aware of each other's identities. If an author is recognized, even with their names removed from the manuscript, reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest, connections, or close associations and must decline the editor's invitation to review the manuscript.

Additionally, if the reviewer suspects that an article may be a significant copy of another work, they must inform the editors. Editors should also be notified if there are concerns that the article's results are false or fraudulent.

INSTRUCTIONS

• All sections of the provided report template for review must be completed.

• In the sections concerning observations, a reasoned motivation for the review must be included.

• The review report may be sent to the author of the manuscript being reviewed, omitting the reviewer's authorship information.

• Complete the section regarding the journal section where the manuscript should be published, considering the following factors:
The "Studies" section publishes papers that contribute to the creation of new, highly scientific knowledge, with content useful to various groups of researchers, legal professionals, government employees, etc.
The "Jurisprudence Commentaries" section publishes case-law studies on relevant topics in Public Law, particularly concerning public administrations and, specifically, the Andalusian administrations. These papers may include an analysis of a specific ruling or a recognized line of jurisprudence.
The "Chronicles and Documents" section features works of medium length (up to 20 pages) or with a narrower scientific scope than those published in the "Studies" section.

CRITERIA FOR PAPER REVIEW

RAAP suggests that reviewers consider the following criteria when reviewing manuscripts:

They should possess knowledge and experience in the subject matter.

They should only perform their duties if they consider themselves competent in the subject matter under review. They must also be available. They agree to respect time limits and follow the journal's guidelines in their work. Furthermore, they must commit to confidentiality, meaning that they may not disclose the manuscript's content to any third party throughout the entire process.

Review Guidelines:

Once the review request has been accepted, reviewers will have 15 days to complete their review, which will be objective, technical, and constructive. During this time, it is the reviewers' responsibility to ensure that the manuscript adheres to the journal's review policy.

The review will be carried out by completing the article evaluation protocol and concluding with its submission via email to raap@us.es. This form covers the following aspects:

• Formal aspects such as:
- The originals follow the maximum length requirements for the article; they include a title (spa/eng), abstract (spa/eng), keywords (spa/eng), and table of contents.
- The originals follow the IMRaD structure (introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion).
- Figures and tables should be included in their appropriate locations in the document.
- The originals include a complete and up-to-date bibliography used for the manuscript, which correctly utilizes the APA citation system.

• Content-related aspects:
- Presentation, clarity and readability.
- Relevance and scientific interest:
     ○ Does the work represent an advance in knowledge?
     ○ Is the subject matter of the work original? Is it engaging?
     ○ Does the work's approach justify its publication?
     ○ Are there practical implications of the research?
     ○ Does this work contribute to enhancing the effectiveness of public administrations?
- Methodological quality:
     ○ Are the sources current and suitable? In other words, do you find the author's bibliography suitable and up-to-date?
○ Is the case law cited by the author suitable and up-to-date?