This policy ensures a rigorous and transparent selection process focused on the scientific quality of the monographs, while guaranteeing the originality and relevance of the research published in your collection.

1. Manuscript Submission

1.1 Authors interested in publishing in our collection must submit an original and unpublished manuscript, which represents a relevant advance in the subjects covered by the scope of the collection,

1.2 The manuscript must follow the established editorial guidelines in terms of format, length and citation as set out in the Submission Guidelines.

1.3 Only original work that has not been published or under review by other publishers will be accepted.

1.4 Doctoral theses and academic papers will not be accepted, except if they are derivative works and constitute a research monograph.

2. Preliminary Evaluation

2.1 Upon receipt of the manuscript, the editor of the collection will carry out an initial review to verify compliance with the editorial standards and to assess its relevance, originality, academic rigour and suitability to the editorial line of the collection.

2.2 At this stage, it will be verified that the manuscript meets the following criteria:

     - Originality of the contribution.
     - Thematic suitability to the collection.
     - Scientific rigour and clarity in the research methodology.

2.3 Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements will be rejected without further review.

3. Review by the Editorial Committee

3.1 Shortlisted manuscripts will be sent to the relevant section editors, who will assess the relevance of the content and its scientific quality in a broader context.

3.2 The section editor will assess:

     - The timeliness and relevance of the topic in the field of art.
     - The structure and coherence of the manuscript.
     - The soundness of the research and arguments presented.

3.3 Following the section editor's evaluation, manuscripts may be accepted for the next phase or rejected if they do not meet the required standards.

4. Peer review

4.1 Section editors will propose scientific reviewers specialised in the topic of the manuscript, who must have published relevant research in the last two years.

4.2 The manuscript will be sent to two scientific reviewers with expertise in the field, following a double-blind peer review process.

4.3 The reviewers will evaluate the following aspects:

     - Methodological rigour.
     - Originality of the research.
     - Contribution to the field of study.
     - Quality of argumentation and presentation.

4.4 Based on the reviewers' reports, the section editor will make a decision on the acceptance, revision or rejection of the manuscript in consultation with the collection editor.

4.5 In the event of a conflict of interest between reviewers and authors, the advisory board will be responsible for resolving the situation, ensuring an impartial process.

4.6 Once the suggestions have been incorporated, the manuscript will move to the production phase, where it will undergo editing, design and layout for final publication.

5. Ethical Considerations

5.1 All manuscripts must comply with the highest ethical standards in research and publication, including the correct citation of sources, respect for copyright and the absence of plagiarism.

5.2 In case of detection of malpractice (plagiarism, falsification of data, etc.), the manuscript will be automatically rejected.