Editorial Policy on Types of Manuscripts

The REMUNOM Journal adopts a broad, pluralistic, and rigorous editorial policy regarding the types of manuscripts eligible for submission, evaluation, and eventual publication, provided they align with the journal's scientific scope, best practices in academic integrity, and the quality criteria required by the editorial process.

In addition to scientific articles resulting from empirical research, quantitative, qualitative, and mixed studies, literature reviews, and academic-professional reports, REMUNOM also considers for evaluation manuscripts in the form of academic essays, theoretical essays, reflective essays, critical essays, conceptual articles, and other analytical contributions that demonstrate scientific relevance, argumentative depth, and an effective contribution to academic debate.

The acceptance of manuscripts in this modality does not imply a relaxation of the editorial quality criteria. On the contrary, theoretical or reflective essays must demonstrate a high degree of conceptual consistency, adequate bibliographical foundation, argumentative originality, and relevance to the field of knowledge in which they are situated.

1. Scope of the Editorial Policy

REMUNOM welcomes scientific contributions of a multidisciplinary nature, encompassing different areas of knowledge, methodological approaches, and academic formats, provided that the manuscript makes a clear contribution to the advancement, systematization, problematization, or deepening of the scientific debate.

Eligible formats for submission include, among others:

original research articles;

empirical studies (qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods);

bibliographic, narrative, integrative, systematic, or scoping reviews;

case studies;

experience reports with academic foundations;

academic essays;

theoretical essays;

reflective essays;

critical essays;

conceptual articles;

documentary, legal, educational, social, cultural, technological, or interdisciplinary analyses;

theoretical discussion texts with a relevant contribution to the field.

Formal eligibility for a manuscript type does not guarantee its approval; all submissions are subject to the journal's regular editorial flow.

2. Academic, Theoretical, and Reflective Essays

REMUNOM accepts academic, theoretical, or reflective essays when they present a consistent contribution to the scientific debate within the journal's scope.

An academic essay is considered to be a manuscript that, without necessarily being structured as traditional empirical research, develops a critical, argumentative, conceptual, or interpretative analysis of a given theme, problem, phenomenon, theory, policy, professional practice, or field of knowledge.

These manuscripts should go beyond mere opinion or description. They are expected to present:

clear delimitation of the central problem or question;

consistent theoretical and bibliographical foundation;

original or relevant academic argument;

critical articulation between concepts, authors, evidence, practices, or contemporary debates;

contribution to the reflection, revision, expansion, or problematization of existing knowledge;

appropriate scientific language;

Internal coherence between objective, argumentative development, and final considerations.

Reflective essays may be considered when they demonstrate analytical maturity, argumentative rigor, and the ability to engage with relevant scientific literature, avoiding a merely opinionated, informal essayistic character, or one detached from academic references.

3. Evaluation Criteria for Theoretical-Reflective Essays and Articles

Academic essays submitted to REMUNOM will be evaluated according to criteria compatible with their textual nature, without necessarily requiring the same methodological elements as traditional empirical research. However, they must present academic rigor proportional to the type of contribution proposed.

Among the criteria observed by the editorial team and ad hoc reviewers, the following stand out:

a) Thematic relevance: pertinence of the theme to the area of ​​knowledge and to the multidisciplinary scope of the journal;

b) Originality of the contribution: ability of the manuscript to offer relevant interpretation, problematization, critical synthesis, or conceptual formulation;

c) Theoretical density: appropriate, up-to-date, and critical use of relevant scientific literature;

d) Argumentative consistency: clarity in the construction of reasoning, logical coherence, and support for the propositions presented;

e) Academic rigor: respect for scientific norms, publication ethics, and adequate substantiation of assertions;

f) Structural clarity: textual organization compatible with the manuscript's purpose, even if different from the classic structure of empirical articles;

g) Contribution to academic debate: the text's potential to broaden discussions, propose new readings, systematize problems, or indicate avenues of investigation;

h) Formal adequacy: conformity