Submissions

Author Guidelines

Forms that all authors must submit when submitting a manuscript for review:

• Entretextos Article Submission Form

• Publication License, Copyright Assignment, and Publication Commitment Form

Scope

Entretextos is a transdisciplinary journal that presents to the public diverse research findings through an intercultural hermeneutics of the forms of knowledge and ways of knowing currently being developed in Latin America and the Caribbean.

It seeks to recover and insert into Latin American social sciences and humanities a philosophical and historical re-understanding of the cultural representations that provide the context for the creation of new discursive and intellectual practices, with the aim of overcoming the colonial paradigm of Modernity and making the intercultural paradigm of dialogues among knowledges more inclusive.

In this regard, the selected thematic areas connected with this purpose are the following: life histories, ethnology, gender studies, political philosophy, hermeneutics, discourse semiotics, epistemologies of the South, philosophy of education, pedagogy and didactics, intercultural ethics, intercultural philosophy, and alternative thought.

Fees

This journal adheres to diamond open access. Consequently, it does not apply any type of article processing charge. Submission, review, and publication are completely free of charge, with no fees for authors or their institutions.

Accepted Contribution Types

Research article. An original contribution that presents, in detail, the results of completed research. Its organization preferably follows the IMRaD model or an equivalent structure that makes explicit the problem, methodological approach, results, and discussion.

Reflection article. An original contribution that presents the results of completed research from an analytical, interpretive, or critical perspective on a specific topic, supported by original sources.

Review article. A contribution that analyzes, systematizes, and integrates results from published research on a field of knowledge, with the purpose of presenting advances, trends, and current debates. It must be based on a rigorous bibliographic review of at least fifty references, covering a minimum period of the last five years.

Short article. A brief scientific contribution that communicates preliminary or partial results of research, or a delimited advance of particular academic interest. Its distinctive feature lies in the bounded, autonomous, and publishable nature of the contribution. The artificial fragmentation of a larger article or the simple reduction of an extensive manuscript will not be accepted as a short article.

Topic review. A contribution devoted to the critical review of the literature on a particular topic. It is oriented toward identifying approaches, debates, gaps, and trends within a delimited field.

Brief orientation or intellectual position paper. A brief text offering orientation or intellectual positioning on a general topic of interest, especially one connected with the dossier, the focus of the issue, or a discussion relevant to the journal’s academic community.

Intellectual profile. A contextualization text, critical tribute, or presentation of the trajectory and relevance of a thinker, author, educator, or intellectual figure connected with the dossier or with the journal’s thematic interests. It may take the form of a biographical sketch or an academic tribute text.

Essay or debate text. A brief argumentative, essayistic, or polemical contribution intended to propose critical reflection, open discussion, or defend a thesis concerning a humanistic, social, philosophical, pedagogical, or intercultural problem.

Cultural or regional text. A flexible contribution oriented toward customary, literary, poetic, heritage-related, or cultural topics in general. It may include brief narratives, cultural evocations, biographical sketches, and poems.

Book review. A brief text offering a critical, informed, and well-argued assessment of a book relevant to the journal’s thematic areas and fields of interest.

Journal Sections

Publishes contributions of the editorial type. It is characterized by offering a brief opening, orientation, or positioning text on a general topic of interest, usually connected with the dossier or with the intellectual horizon of the issue. Editorials are evaluated by the editorial committee and are mainly invited.

Publishes contributions of the intellectual profile type. It is characterized by highlighting the trajectory, work, relevance, or academic significance of a thinker, author, or intellectual figure related to the dossier or to the journal’s fields of interest.

Presentation. Publishes contributions of the presentation type. It is characterized by introducing the dossier or issue, explaining its thematic focus, organizing its interpretive axes, and contextualizing the set of texts gathered. This section is exclusive to the editorial committee and, mainly, to guest editors in a dossier.

Articles. Publishes original contributions corresponding to the following types: research article, reflection article, review article, short article, and topic review. It is characterized by bringing together the journal’s central scientific production in its various forms of development, systematization, reflection, and research advancement. Articles are evaluated by external reviewers under a double-blind modality.

Publishes contributions of the academic essay or debate text type. It is characterized by welcoming brief texts involving critical reflection, conceptual discussion, or essayistic argumentation on problems of humanistic, social, philosophical, pedagogical, or intercultural interest. They are evaluated by external reviewers under a double-blind modality.

Regional Brushstrokes. Publishes contributions of the cultural or regional text, cultural essay, cultural biographical sketch, brief narrative, and poetry types, provided they are relevant to the journal’s identity. It is characterized by opening a space for cultural, literary, and symbolic expression connected with territories, memories, languages, traditions, and regional sensibilities.

Book Reviews. Publishes contributions of the book review type. It is characterized by disseminating critical assessments of works relevant to the journal’s thematic fields and to the academic debate it promotes.

Manuscript Presentation

Accepted Languages

Contributions are accepted, in addition to Spanish/Castilian, in Wayuunaiki, English, French, Italian, and Portuguese, or in their respective translations into Spanish.

Accepted File Format for Submission

The body of the manuscript is accepted exclusively in .docx or .doc files. Submission of the manuscript body in any other format will not be considered.

Manuscript Preparation

The following recommendations must be followed:

Title: Spanish/Castilian and English.

Abstract: Between 100 and 300 words, with 4 or 5 keywords, in Spanish/Castilian, accompanied by an abstract in English.

Font: Times New Roman, 12 pt, single spacing, paragraphs separated with 0 pt before and 6 pt after. Properly justified charts and tables are accepted.

Length According to Type or Section

Editorial: variable.

Profiles: variable.

Articles —research, reflection, review, short articles, and topic reviews—: minimum 15 pages and maximum 20 pages.

Arguments: between 10 and 15 pages.

Regional Brushstrokes: variable.

Book Reviews: maximum 3 pages.

Authorship Information

Anonymization

The editorial team will anonymize manuscripts before submitting them to peer review. The information in the manuscripts must be complete to ensure proper identification.

On the Recognition of Authorship

Only persons —human beings— who meet the minimum conditions established in the Contribution Statement Policy may be considered authors. According to this policy, to be considered an author, a person must contribute at least in the following ways:

Criteria for Authorship

Have made substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work, or to the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data; and

Have participated in drafting the manuscript or in critically reviewing its most relevant intellectual content; and

Have definitively approved the version to be submitted for publication.

To meet criterion 1, select from the following list all items deemed appropriate:

Conceptualization

Methodology

Investigation

Data curation

Formal analysis

Validation

To meet criterion 2, select from the following list all items deemed appropriate:

Writing — original draft

Writing — review and editing

To meet criterion 3, it must be expressly indicated that the submitted version was approved:

Definitive approval of the manuscript submitted to the journal.

Under no circumstances may generative artificial intelligence, or any type of artificial intelligence, present or future, be considered an author or co-author.

To learn the scope of each contribution, review the journal’s Contribution Statement Policy.

Essential Information That Each Author Must Provide

Name in the form used for publication.

ORCID iD with minimum information completed. At a minimum, ORCID must show the author’s highest academic degree and academic affiliation.

Email address, preferably institutional. Each author’s email address will always be public.

Academic affiliation, at the highest hierarchical level —for example, the university rather than its faculties—, city, state or province if necessary, and country of affiliation.

Add a biodata statement. In it, include a brief comment about yourself indicating your academic degrees in descending order, regardless of when they were obtained. Indicate your academic affiliation, including association with centers, faculties, universities, research groups, among others. You may include information about your most recent publications, adding links in footnotes, provided they are of exclusively academic interest. You may include any other biographical mention you consider important. The biodata statement must not exceed ten lines.

In the case of Colombian authors or foreign authors working in Colombian institutions, registration in Minciencias’ CvLAC is required, along with the information necessary to verify that registration.

Citation and Reference Standard

The journal adopts the current version of APA style for manuscript presentation, in-text citations, and preparation of the reference list. At present, the journal uses the 7th edition of APA Style, in accordance with the official guidelines of the American Psychological Association. All manuscripts submitted to the journal must comply with this standard in its most recent version, unless expressly indicated otherwise by the editorial board for specific cases.

For preparing manuscripts, authors may consult the official APA Style guide, available on the institutional website of the American Psychological Association. The following APA Style resource may be used as the official link for the editorial policy:

https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/references/examples

Examples of In-Text Citation Use

As a general rule, citations follow the following model in all cases:

Author-prominent citation

Arita and Rodríguez (2001), Luna (1995, 2001)

Restrepo and Jaramillo (2007)

Soler et al. (1987)

Gómez et al. (1987a)

Text-prominent citation

(Arita & Rodríguez, 2001; Luna, 1995)

(Luna, 1995; 2001)

(Restrepo & Jaramillo, 2007)

(Soler et al., 1987)

(Gómez et al., 1987b)

Examples of Reference Use

As a general rule, when information such as volume number, edition number, page numbers, or e-location ID is missing, it may be omitted as indicated in the official guide linked above.

When a resource has been obtained from a database, only the source —journal/book— is cited, not the database, unless it is original content. URLs or DOIs are included only if that database provides free access to the resource.

Journal Article

Fornet-Betancourt, R. (2016). Panorámica de la Filosofía Intercultural. Entretextos, 10(18), 12-31.

Grady, J. S., Her, M., Moreno, G., Perez, C., & Yelinek, J. (2019). Emotions in storybooks: A comparison of storybooks that represent ethnic and racial groups in the United States. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 8(3), 207–217. https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000185

Journal Article with e-location ID

Pitre Ruiz, L. (2026). Ciencia, territorio y sostenibilidad: perspectivas para un futuro transformador. Ciencia e Ingeniería, 13(1), artículo e17773036. https://n2t.net/ark:/60540/17773036

Jerrentrup, A., Mueller, T., Glowalla, U., Herder, M., Henrichs, N., Neubauer, A., & Schaefer, J. R. (2018). Teaching medicine with the help of “Dr. House.” PLoS ONE, 13(3), Article e0193972. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193972

Newspaper Article

Carey, B. (2019, March 22). Can we get better at forgetting? The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/22/health/memory-forgetting-psychology.htmlopens in new window

Harlan, C. (2013, April 2). North Korea vows to restart shuttered nuclear reactor that can make bomb-grade plutonium. The Washington Post, A1, A4.

Stobbe, M. (2020, January 8). Cancer death rate in U.S. sees largest one-year drop ever. Chicago Tribune.

Book with Author(s)

Jackson, L. M. (2019). The psychology of prejudice: From attitudes to social action (2nd ed.). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000168-000opens in new window

Sapolsky, R. M. (2017). Behave: The biology of humans at our best and worst. Penguin Books.

Book with Editor | Coordinator | Compiler

Hygum, E., & Pedersen, P. M. (Eds.). (2010). Early childhood education: Values and practices in Denmark. Hans Reitzels Forlag. https://earlychildhoodeducation.digi.hansreitzel.dk/opens in new window

Kesharwani, P. (Ed.). (2020). Nanotechnology based approaches for tuberculosis treatment. Academic Press.

Republished Book, with Editor

Watson, J. B., & Rayner, R. (2013). Conditioned emotional reactions: The case of Little Albert (D. Webb, Ed.). CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform. https://a.co/06Se6Naopens in new window (Original work published 1920)

Multi-Volume Book

Harris, K. R., Graham, S., & Urdan T. (Eds.). (2012). APA educational psychology handbook (Vols. 1–3). American Psychological Association.

Manual

American Psychiatric Association. (1980). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (3rd ed.).

American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.books.9780890420614.dsm-iv

Entry in a Manual

American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Anxiety disorders. In Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596.dsm05

Chapter in an Edited Book

Aron, L., Botella, M., & Lubart, T. (2019). Culinary arts: Talent and their development. In R. F. Subotnik, P. Olszewski-Kubilius, & F. C. Worrell (Eds.), The psychology of high performance: Developing human potential into domain-specific talent (pp. 345–359). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000120-016opens in new window

Dillard, J. P. (2020). Currents in the study of persuasion. In M. B. Oliver, A. A. Raney, & J. Bryant (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (4th ed., pp. 115–129). Routledge.

Chapter in an Edited Book, Reprinted from Another Book

Bronfenbrenner, U. (2005). The social ecology of human development: A retrospective conclusion. In U. Bronfenbrenner (Ed.), Making human beings human: Bioecological perspectives on human development (pp. 27–40). SAGE Publications. (Reprinted from Brain and intelligence: The ecology of child development, pp. 113–123, by F. Richardson, Ed., 1973, National Educational Press)

For more examples and source types, use the official online publication issued by APA at: https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/references/examples.

Publication Frequency

Entretextos is published every four months. It publishes three issues per year, corresponding to the periods January–April, May–August, and September–December. Issues appear during the first days of the first month of each period.

Ethics for Authors

Principles Guiding the Journal’s Editorial Ethics

The editorial practice of this journal is governed by the following principles:

Academic integrity. The journal promotes honesty in the production, presentation, evaluation, and publication of knowledge.

Editorial transparency. Editorial decisions must be based on public, understandable criteria that are consistent with the journal’s policies.

Impartiality and equity. Manuscripts are evaluated according to their academic merit, relevance, and contribution, without undue discrimination on personal, institutional, ideological, territorial, linguistic, ethnic, gender-based, or any other grounds incompatible with responsible scientific evaluation.

Public responsibility. The journal recognizes that published texts form part of the scientific record and, therefore, assumes the duty to correct, clarify, issue warnings, or retract when necessary to preserve the reliability of circulating knowledge.

Respect for epistemological and contextual diversity. Human@sGuajira values the plurality of theoretical, methodological, territorial, and disciplinary approaches, provided that they meet verifiable academic and ethical standards.

Due editorial process. Any suspicion or complaint regarding misconduct must be examined with prudence, confidentiality, the right of reply, well-founded review of the evidence, and proportionality in the measures adopted.

Best Practices to Ensure Editorial Ethics: Responsibilities of Authors

Authors must submit original, methodologically honest, and properly supported works. They must declare that the manuscript has not been simultaneously submitted to another scientific journal or any other type of publication, that it does not constitute duplicate or redundant publication, and that it sufficiently and verifiably acknowledges the sources used.

They must also ensure that attributed authorship reflects real contributions to the work, that there are no fictitious, honorary, or invisible authors, and that all relevant information concerning funding, conflicts of interest, permissions, consent, or ethical approvals is clearly declared when applicable.

Authors also have the obligation to cooperate with the journal if complementary information, methodological clarifications, supporting data, rectifications, or corrections are requested after evaluation or publication.

Originality, Unpublished Status, and Exclusive Submission

The journal only receives original and unpublished manuscripts that have not been previously published and are not simultaneously under evaluation by another journal, book, collective work, or editorial outlet. Originality, novelty, and the academic interest of the topic constitute substantive criteria for editorial admission.

Manuscripts with preprint versions may be submitted, provided that they comply with the provisions of the policy “On the Use and Promotion of Preprints.”

Misconduct in Scientific Publication

The journal considers misconduct in scientific publication to include all actions or omissions that compromise the originality, truthfulness, traceability, legitimate authorship, transparency, or reliability of a manuscript or of an already published text.

The journal explicitly recognizes, among others, the following forms of misconduct:

Plagiarism, understood as the partial or total appropriation of ideas, arguments, data, textual structures, images, tables, or expressions from third parties without adequate acknowledgment of the source.

Self-plagiarism or undisclosed text recycling, when an author substantively reuses their own previously published materials without indicating this transparently and without sufficient editorial justification.

Duplicate, redundant, or fragmented publication, including the presentation of the same study as if it were different works without sufficient information for the reader or the journal.

Simultaneous submission of the same manuscript to more than one scientific journal.

Fabrication, falsification, or manipulation of data, results, documents, citations, tables, graphs, images, or research evidence.

Improper manipulation of images or supplementary materials that alters the meaning or interpretation of the content.

Improper authorship, including honorary authorship, guest/gift authorship, purchased authorship, exclusion of authors with real contributions, or inclusion of persons who did not participate substantively in the work.

Omission or falsification of conflicts of interest.

Manipulation of peer review, including fraudulent reviewer suggestions, identity impersonation, or undue interference in the decision-making process.

Manipulated, coercive, or artificially inflated citation, when references are introduced without sufficient academic justification in order to alter metrics, favor specific actors, or simulate bibliographic support.

Circularity, derived from the above, as when a secondary source is cited to state basic, widely known theory in order to benefit certain authors or journals. The same applies when, except in specific studies, a single source accounts for more than one-third of the reference list.

Concealment of relevant ethical information, such as lack of consent, permissions, institutional authorizations, or approvals required by the nature of the study.

Misleading or undeclared use of technological tools, including tools that produce or alter text, images, data, references, or evaluations in a manner incompatible with authorial and editorial responsibility.

Means, Tools, and Procedures to Prevent, Detect, and Remedy Misconduct

Human@sGuajira adopts a combination of preventive, verification, and editorial correction measures.

Preventive Measures

The journal requires authors to know and accept its editorial policies before initiating a submission. It also publicly informs its evaluation criteria, originality requirements, and position regarding misconduct.

The journal may request statements of originality, authorship, conflicts of interest, funding, ethical approval, informed consent, and data availability, according to the nature of the manuscript.

Verification Tools

The publishing institution has access to Turnitin Similarity as a support tool for reviewing textual similarity. Its use makes it possible to identify textual matches, review similarity reports, and detect matches that require editorial analysis. However, the similarity report does not by itself constitute automatic proof of plagiarism: Turnitin expressly indicates that it detects textual similarities and that the determination of plagiarism corresponds to human academic and editorial judgment.

For this reason, Human@sGuajira does not interpret similarity percentages mechanically or apply decontextualized automatic thresholds. Each case will be reviewed according to the nature of the detected matches, the presence of correctly marked citations, the length of the fragments involved, the type of manuscript, and the possible existence of improper conduct.

In addition to similarity review, the journal may use additional editorial checks, such as comparison of versions, verification of references, review of metadata, requests for methodological clarifications, verification of affiliations, image review, and analysis of argumentative or documentary consistency.

Procedure for Examining Cases of Misconduct

When a complaint, a well-founded suspicion, or a reasonable indication of misconduct exists, the journal will conduct a preliminary assessment of the evidence. If the situation warrants it, the journal may temporarily suspend the editorial processing of the manuscript while complementary information is gathered.

Subsequently, the journal may request explanations from the authors or other persons involved, require supporting documents, request corrections or additional evidence, and, when appropriate, consult COPE guidance, cases, discussions, or flowcharts in order to decide the most appropriate procedural pathway.

If the seriousness of the case requires it, the journal may bring the evidence to the attention of the authors’ affiliated institution or other competent authorities.

Editorial Measures in Cases of Misconduct

Once the examination of the case has concluded, Human@sGuajira may adopt, according to the nature, seriousness, and available evidence, one or more of the following measures:

request for formal clarifications;

request for corrections or substantive modifications;

requirement to correct authorship, affiliation, or declarations;

rejection of the manuscript;

suspension of the editorial process;

publication of a correction, erratum, or editorial note;

publication of an editorial expression of concern when there is a well-founded concern that still requires further clarification;

full or partial retraction of the article;

communication of the case to competent institutions or bodies;

temporary restriction of new submissions by those found responsible, in serious or repeated cases.

For already published texts, the journal will act bearing in mind that correction or retraction does not seek to punish authors in itself, but to correct the literature and preserve the integrity of the scientific record, a criterion expressly emphasized by COPE in its retraction guidance.

Corrections, Clarifications, Retractions, and Preservation of the Scientific Record

When a published text contains minor errors that do not invalidate its results, the journal may publish formally identified corrections or clarifications.

When errors, omissions, or irregularities substantively compromise the reliability of the work, the journal may issue editorial expressions of concern or retractions, maintaining the greatest possible transparency regarding the reasons for the decision and preserving the historical character of the published record, except in exceptional situations involving legal matters or serious harm.

Conflicts of Interest, Complaints, and Appeals

Every person participating in the editorial process must promptly declare any real, potential, or apparent conflict of interest that could affect their independence of judgment. See the explicit Conflict of Interest Declaration Policy.

The journal will receive and examine, in a well-founded manner, complaints, reports, or appeals concerning editorial decisions or possible ethical breaches. These submissions will be handled with confidentiality, respect for due process, and reasoned assessment of the available evidence.

Editorial Process

Every manuscript received by the journal will be formally registered and submitted, in a first stage, to a preliminary editorial review. At this stage, the editorial team will verify the thematic relevance of the text in relation to the journal’s focus and scope, compliance with presentation guidelines, the general coherence of the argumentative structure, the integrity of metadata, the adequacy of references, and observance of the ethical principles of publication. When the manuscript does not meet these minimum conditions, it may be returned to its authors for initial adjustments or rejected without being sent for external review.

Manuscripts that pass this preliminary review will be anonymized and sent for peer review. For research articles and other contributions subject to arbitration, evaluation will be conducted under the double-blind modality, so that the identity of the authors will not be revealed to the reviewers, nor the identity of the reviewers to the authors. In the case of original publications, review will be exclusively external. Non-peer-reviewed sections, such as editorials or other institutional texts, will undergo only editorial review, ensuring the integrity of the journal.

Based on the reports received, the journal may adopt the following editorial decisions: accepted without changes, accepted with minor changes, resubmission for review after major changes, or rejected. The final decision will correspond to the editorial committee and will be communicated exclusively in writing.

When a manuscript receives a request for corrections, its authors must submit a new version within the deadline indicated by the journal, accompanied, when applicable, by a reasoned response to the review observations. Minor corrections may be verified directly by the editorial team; major corrections, however, may be sent again for review to confirm the adequate incorporation of the requested changes. If corrections are not submitted within the established deadline, the journal may consider the manuscript withdrawn or reject it for failure to comply with the editorial process.

Once definitively accepted, the manuscript will enter the final editing stage, which may include copyediting, bibliographic normalization, metadata adjustment, layout, proof review, and editorial validation prior to publication. The final appearance of the text will take place according to the journal’s schedule and publication frequency.

Peer Review

The journal uses double-blind peer review for research articles and for all contributions that, by their nature, require academic arbitration. As a general rule, each research article will be sent to two (2) external reviewers who are specialists in the subject matter.

The assessment of manuscripts will consider, among other aspects, the following general criteria: originality and relevance of the topic; contribution to the field of knowledge; theoretical, conceptual, or methodological soundness; clarity of argumentation; consistency among objectives, development, and conclusions; currency and relevance of the bibliography; quality of academic writing; and compliance with the ethical principles of research and scientific publication.

The possible results of the review process are the following:

Accepted without changes: the manuscript may proceed to final editing without substantive modifications.

Accepted with minor changes: the manuscript requires specific adjustments in form, conceptual precision, or delimited development.

Resubmission for review after major changes: the manuscript has academic potential but requires substantial modifications before a final decision can be adopted.

Rejected: the manuscript does not meet the scientific, methodological, argumentative, or ethical conditions required by the journal.

As a general rule, publication of an article will require two favorable reports. When there is controversy between the reports, the journal will request a third report to resolve it. If the discrepancy derives from a rejection based on serious objections concerning the scientific, methodological, or ethical validity of the manuscript, the journal may request two new reviews, up to a total of four reports, before adopting a final decision. In all cases, the editorial decision will be based on the reports received and will be formally communicated to the authors.

Review the submissions submenu “General Guidelines for Manuscript Evaluation” and the “Manuscript Evaluation Instrument.”

The evaluation form can be downloaded at the following link: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZLfOceM3kZGwNodeC50c0s0yfixPbyMo/edit?usp=drive_link&ouid=109796143304560459663&rtpof=true&sd=true

Average Response Times

The journal reports average response times separately for the main stages of the editorial process. These deadlines are estimates and may vary according to reviewer availability, manuscript complexity, the number of correction rounds, and the editorial schedule of each issue.

Average time for initial editorial review: 2.5 weeks.

Average time for peer review: 8 weeks.

Average time for editorial decision once the reports have been received: 1 to 2 weeks.

Estimated average time between acceptance and publication: approximate minimum of 24 weeks.

Manuscript Submission

At present, the journal receives articles exclusively by email: [email protected]

Editorial Contact

Use the same email address mentioned above to resolve any questions.