##plugins.block.makeSubmission.linkLabel##

Review format - ACDI

Form receipt date:

Article title:

Reviewer’s information
Full name
Identification document	Number
	Type	Citizenship card Foreign identification card Passport
Highest level of education	Post-doctoral degree Doctorate Master’s degree Major Undergraduate studies
Degree field of knowledge
Specific field of knowledge as an expert
Main institutional affiliation
Has a resume in the Colombian ScienTI system	Yes No
Email address
Landline			Cell phone

Please rate your level of agreement with the following statements from 1 to 5, 1 being the lowest score.

1. Article originality

a. The article contributes to constructing new concepts, redeveloping existing ones, and modifying sociolegal research.

1. Strongly disagree
2. Disagree
3. Neither agree nor disagree

4. Agree

5. Completely agree

Comments:

2. References and state of the art review

b. It is possible to distinguish the contributions made by the author with regard to the information from other texts and authors.

1. Strongly disagree
2. Disagree
3. Neither agree nor disagree

4. Agree

5. Completely agree

Comments:

c. The author makes use of the most relevant sources in the field of knowledge of the paper in question.

1. Strongly disagree
2. Disagree
3. Neither agree nor disagree

4. Agree

5. Completely agree

Comments:

3. Methodological rigor

d. The objectives established by the author in the Introduction/Abstract are fully met; in other words, the stated objectives and the results obtained are consistent.

1. Strongly disagree
2. Disagree
3. Neither agree nor disagree

4. Agree

5. Totally agree

Comments:

e. The methodology applied and the results obtained from research are clear.

1. Strongly disagree
2. Disagree
3. Neither agree nor disagree

4. Agree

5. Completely agree

Comments:

4. Clarity and consistency of statements

f. The article’s structure and style are accurate and simple, also being the most suitable to understand the type of information provided.

1. Strongly disagree
2. Disagree
3. Neither agree nor disagree

4. Agree

5. Completely agree

Comments:

5. Relevance of the results obtained

g. The topic, approach, and results provided by the article are relevant for the development of the corresponding field and the change in the legal reality.

1. Strongly disagree
2. Disagree
3. Neither agree nor disagree

4. Agree

5. Completely agree

Comments:

h. The ideas included in the text are soundly supported and backed up to meet the research objectives.

1. Strongly disagree
2. Disagree
3. Neither agree nor disagree

4. Agree

5. Completely agree

Comments:

i. In your opinion, does the article meet the classification indicated by the author?

Yes

No

If the answer is no or if you feel that the author’s classification is not clear, which do you think is the most suitable article type?

1. Scientific and technological research article X

2. Reflection paper

3. Review article

4. Short article

5. Case report

6. Thematic review

7. Letters to the editor

8. Editorial

9. Translation

10. Reflection paper (nonresearch derived)

11. Literature review

6. Score

j. According to your assessment, you feel that the article quality is…

Excellent

Good

Acceptable

Poor

k. The article must be…

Accepted as it is

Accepted on the condition that minor revisions are made prior to publication

Accepted, provided that the version including the corrections requested by you is subject to a subsequent review

Rejected

Comments and remarks for the author(s):

Please write a synopsis of the academic evaluation containing the most important remarks on the assessed article. Highlight any contribution, gap, limitation, or suggestions for the text. Use as many pages as necessary.