They are suitable people in the themes and sections of the Journal FIGEMPA: Investigación y Desarrollo, with experience in research and publications.

Participation in the FIGEMPA: Investigación y Desarrollo is done by direct invitation to review in each volume a maximum of two articles.

If possible, reviewers will be renewed in each issue of the post and can be re-invited after one year. Reviewers will be rated by the publisher in order to recognize compliance with established times and the quality of the review.

The participation of the reviewers does not generate any type of employment or contractual link with the Central University of Ecuador, the FIGEMPA or the FIGEMPA Research and Development Journal.

Reviewers will be eligible for "COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers" (COPE, 2019).

Reviewers may refuse the invitation if they believe there may be a personal or professional conflict of interest. 

Functions

• Review articles and issue comments, recommendations and concept on their publication. 
• Review the structure of the articles, the fulfillment of the instructions for the authors and the consistency between the components of the text. 
• Issue concept of publication recommendation with precision on the scientific quality of the article under review. 
• Verify compliance with declared ethical principles and ensure respect for ethical conduct associated with scientific production. 
• If necessary, identify and propose publications or authors that are considered relevant and that were not cited by the author. 
• Meet the agreed deadlines for the revision of the articles. 
• Keeping anonymity and confidentiality about your work until the Magazine has been published. 
• Respect copyright rules. 
• Provide the personal and academic information required by the publication and some SIR.

Criteria for identification and selection of Reviewers

In order to achieve a good criterion that guarantees the quality of the publication, the Reviewer will be selected for his experience, knowledge on the subject referred to in the article to be evaluated and ethical values. Resume. 

Reviewer Evaluation Criteria

1.- Compliance with review deadlines. 
2.- Response to communications.
3.- Proper use of the article evaluation format.
4.- Suitable ethical behavior in its role as reviewer.

Reviewer debugging criteria

1.- Unjustified non-compliance with review deadlines.
2.- Voluntary disengagement as reviewers.
3.- Inadequate use of evaluation format.
4.- Improper use of the information of the articles subject to review.
5.- Conflict of interest.

Criteria for updating the Reviewer Bank

1.- Exchange of databases of reviewers with other magazines in the area.
2.- Articles with specific topics that require intervention