Submissions

Author Guidelines

Guidelines for Contributors

1. The evaluation, processing, and publication of contributions are free of charge.
2. Journal Sections:

2.1 Dossier, Literature, History, Historiography, Cultural Studies, Gender, Education, and Linguistics: sections consisting of specialized, original, and unpublished research articles in Spanish. Each article must be 12 to 25 pages in length, double-spaced (12-point Arial, approximately 25 lines and 78 characters per line). It must include a title in Spanish and English, an abstract in Spanish and English, keywords, and references.

2.2 Mirada Crítica (Critical Gaze): a section composed of reviews, essays, documents of general academic interest, and interviews with notable figures. Essays should be 12 to 25 pages long; documents and interviews, 8 to 10 pages; and reviews, 3 to 5 pages.

2.3 Each issue of the journal must contain a minimum of 5 articles.

Peer Review Process

Material submitted to Fuentes Humanísticas must be unpublished (all texts will be checked with Turnitin plagiarism detection software) and not under consideration by another publication. Reviews, commentaries, and essays will undergo a pre-review in a double-blind modality by the Editorial Committee. Research articles will be subject to a pre-review in a double-blind modality (1 pre-review) to assess their relevance, followed by a second phase of review in a double-blind modality by external specialists.

The journal's Editorial Committee will approve materials for publication based on their academic quality, considering that the materials must be original and that each issue should have a minimum of five articles.

All received material will be subject to an editorial pre-review, conducted by a member of the Editorial Committee. This pre-review will evaluate the material's relevance to the journal, as well as its formal aspects, such as general structure, length, and critical apparatus. This pre-review does not constitute an evaluation of the academic quality of the material, which will be the subject of the review proper. The maximum period for the issuance of the editorial pre-review is ten business days from the date the editorial team sends the notification. The materials proposed for the "Mirada Crítica" section will only require an editorial pre-review issued by a member of the Editorial Committee for their approval.

The Editorial Committee proposes reviewers for the materials, and the Responsible Editor determines their suitability. The criteria for selecting a reviewer are as follows: a history of research and deep knowledge in the corresponding field, the absence of bias or conflicts of interest during the evaluation, a commitment to meeting delivery deadlines, and a commitment to conducting a professional and respectful evaluation. In the case of materials written by an individual external to the Department of Humanities, the reviews may be assigned to the academic staff of the Department. For articles by authors affiliated with the Department of Humanities, the three reviews must be conducted by individuals external to the Autonomous Metropolitan University (UAM).

Materials corresponding to the research article sections (Dossier, Literature, History, Historiography, Cultural Studies, Gender, Education, and Linguistics) will be subject to three reviews under a double-blind system. Reviewers will submit their judgment within a maximum of fifteen business days from the date the editorial team sends the notification. Articles will be evaluated in one of the following categories: 1) publishable in its current state, 2) publishable with recommendations, or 3) not publishable. Once the anonymous and external reviews are completed, the Editorial Committee will make the final decision and issue the definitive judgment. In the event that the definitive judgment, communicated to the author, classifies the article as "publishable with recommendations," the author will have fifteen business days to make the requested modifications, counted from the date the editorial team sends the notification. The Responsible Editor, with the support of the Editorial Committee, will evaluate the proper implementation of these modifications.

The Editorial Committee will ensure that the entire editing process is conducted under the principles of good editorial practices and academic ethics protocols, and will be governed by the UAM Code of Ethics. It also subscribes to the Guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Editorial Criteria for Fuentes Humanísticas

The title of the work should be written in title case, without a final period or underlining, and should not exceed 15 words. The author's name, ORCID (if you don't have one, click here), and the name of their affiliated institution will appear at the end of the text, and a curriculum vitae note no longer than five lines (approximately 50 words) will be attached.

Research papers must include in both Spanish and English: the title, the abstract with a length no longer than five lines, and at least four keywords.

Textual quotes shorter than four lines will follow the main text on the same line and with a left margin of five spaces (one tab) relative to the rest of the body of the text.

Contributions can be individual or collective.

All pages that make up the text must be numbered with consecutive Arabic numerals, at the bottom center.

Original manuscripts must follow the APA 7 model for citations, bibliography, and references (see: APA Guidelines).

For source citation, the author's last name, publication date, and page number will be placed in parentheses within the text, immediately following the quote, following this format:

The authors maintain that "in a text not everything is said, it is always necessary to infer and interpret" (Hernández and González, 2009, p.47).

Or also:

Rosaura Hernández and María Emilia González (2009, p.47) maintain that "in a text not everything is said, it is always necessary to infer and interpret."

Citations that refer to an idea but not its author (indirect) should be indicated as follows:

Prototype theory (Hudson, 1981) allows for this kind of creative flexibility in the application of concepts.

Bibliography, Journal Articles, and Online Sources

Entries should follow these models:

Bibliography

Bibliographical references will be presented as follows: Last name(s), initials (year). Book Title. Place of publication: Publisher.

Almendros, N. (1992). Cinemanía: ensayo sobre cine. Barcelona: Seix Barral.

Eco, U., (2009). Apocalípticos e integrados (2nd ed.). Mexico: Fábula en Tusquets.

Two or more authors:

Hernández Monroy, R., González Días, M. E. (2009). Prácticas de la lectura en el ámbito universitario. Mexico: Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana-Azcapotzalco.

Chapter in a book:

González Echeverría, R. (1984). "Humanismo, retórica y las crónicas de la Conquista." In Roberto González Echeverría (comp.), Historia y ficción den la narrativa hispanoamericana. Coloquio de Yale (pp. 149-166). Caracas: Monte Ávila Editores.

Thesis (Doctoral or Master's):

Rey Pereira, C. (2000). Discurso histórico y discurso literario. El caso de El Carnero (Doctoral Thesis). Madrid: Universidad Autónoma de Madrid.

Journal Article Entry

Journal article entries will be presented as follows:

Last name(s), initials (year). Title of the article. Journal Name, vol., (no.), pp.

Granados Chapa, Miguel Ángel. El esfuerzo improductivo de la nación. Proceso, (286), pp. 14-15.

Juliano, D. Cultura popular. Cuadernos de Antropología, (16), pp.25-38.

Newspaper Article Entry:

Newspaper article entries will be presented as follows: Last name(s), initials. Date of publication (day, month, year). Title of the article. Newspaper Name, pages on which the article appears.

García Soler, L. A mitad del foro. Convocatoria y llamados a misa. La jornada. (January 11, 2009), p. 16.

Online Sources (Electronic Material)

Electronic book:

Bibliographical references will be presented as follows:

Last name(s), initials (year). Book Title. Retrieved from http:// -URL or [electronic version].

Lotman, I. M. (1996). La semiosfera I. Semiótica de la cultura y del texto. Retrieved from http://culturaspopulares.org/populares/documentosdiplomado/I.%20-%20Semiosfera%20.pfd

Models for special cases.

Any aspect not covered by these guidelines will be resolved by the Editorial Committee.

Pre-Review and Review Format

PRE-REVIEW FORMAT

Work Title: ______________________________________________________________________

Nature of Contribution:

( ) Article

( ) Essay

( ) Review

( ) Commentary

Formal Evaluation

Does the work comply with the editorial requirements for critical apparatus?

Yes ( ) No ( )

Does it meet the established length? Yes ( ) No ( )

Does it have a relevant and sufficient bibliography? Yes ( ) No ( )

Does the title correspond to the content? Yes ( ) No ( )

Does the work have a clear objective? Yes ( ) No ( )

Is the structure coherent and appropriate? Yes ( ) No ( )

Is the work well-written? Yes ( ) No ( )

Substance and Content Evaluation

1. a) Does the text demonstrate thematic relevance and originality? Yes ( ) No ( )
2. b) Does it present a discussion of the subject matter and a contribution to the

advancement of the discipline? Yes ( ) No ( )

1. c) Does it have consistency and structure in the presentation of objectives? Yes ( ) No ( )
2. d) Is there a proper orientation of the line of argumentation (or of the empirical

evidence) toward the foundation of the essential points? Yes ( ) No ( )

1. e) Does it show an evaluation of the use and updating of sources? Yes ( ) No ( )
2. f) Is there a correspondence between the methodology and the objectives of the

research and/or theoretical reflection? Yes ( ) No ( )

1. g) Does the article present a scientific or technological contribution to its field

of research? Yes ( ) No ( )

1.- Do you consider the work relevant within the announced field? Why?

2.- Indicate the originality of the text

3.- Make specific mention of the quality of the article

4.- What is the contribution to the field of study?

5.- Suggestions

6.- How do you rate the contribution?

( ) Send to review

( ) Return to author for correction

( ) Not accepted

7.- What reviewers do you suggest?

REVIEW FORMAT

Work Title: ______________________________________________________________________

FORMAL AND CONTENT EVALUATION

1.- Does it meet the established length? Yes ( ) No ( )

2.- Does it have a relevant and sufficient bibliography? Yes ( ) No ( )

3.- Does the title correspond to the content? Yes ( ) No ( )

4.- Does the work have a clear objective? Yes ( ) No ( )

5.- Is there a systematic exposition of the topic? Yes ( ) No ( )

6.- Is the work well-written? Yes ( ) No ( )

7.- Is there connection and coherence in the text's structure? Yes ( ) No ( )

8.- What do you consider to be the contributions of the work?

9.- What suggestions would you make to the author of the text?

JUDGMENT

How do you rate the contribution?

( ) Approved in its current state

( ) Approved subject to modifications*

( ) Not publishable