For Authors - Editorial workflow

Here's a clean English translation:

Creating or Using a HAL Account

Article submissions are made through the HAL platform. You must therefore have a personal HAL account, or create one if you do not already have one.

If you need more information about creating a HAL account, please follow this link: https://doc.hal.science/compte-et-profil/#mes-informations.

1. Submitting the First Version of the Article to HAL

The first version of the article is submitted to HAL by the author as a preprint. The document format must comply with the guidelines described on the journal's website.

2. Associating the Article with the Journal

Once the submission has been validated on HAL, you will need to submit your article to the journal Détours via the HAL–Episciences gateway. This feature appears at the end of the submission form only if both of the following conditions are met: the document type selected is "Preprint/Prepublication" and a file containing the full text has been uploaded. This step allows the editorial committee to process the manuscript through the peer review workflow.

Please note that this operation cannot be performed immediately after submission: the deposit must first be validated and processed by HAL, which may take approximately one week.

3. Peer Review Process

Following editorial intake, articles will be sent out for peer review

Non-blind peer review : submitted articles are reviewed by peers who are experts in the field. Peers evaluate the relevance of articles, their methodology, quality, originality, etc. according to a grid provided by the editorial committee, and with kindness (see ethical charter).

4. Exchange Between Reviewers and Authors:

Authors and reviewers are non-anonymous and can engage in dialogue when proposing an article for the journal. This dialogue should not be an opportunity for the author to ask the reviewer for lengthy editorial assistance, but should only serve to establish a focused discussion that relates solely to the article proposal, with a view to its acceptance or rejection. Each author is responsible for their own work.

5. Review by the editorial committee : an editorial committee, organised ad hoc by the coordinators of each issue, reviews the recommendations of the reviewers and decides whether to accept or reject the article. The committee reserves the right to provide authors with additional comments with a view to improving their article.

6. Revision and publication
Peer review reports and comments are not anonymised. They may be published with the consent of the parties involved (author, reviewer and editorial committee). Authors and reviewers follow the workflow proposed in this framework and posted on the Episciences website. This review process may be repeated several times until the article is deemed acceptable for publication.

Instructions

Send a Word file, without formatting. It will automatically be converted to PDF format by the platform.

Between 30,000 and 50,000 characters, including bibliography and spaces.

Footnotes are accepted; they will be automated and numbered at the bottom of the page.

Metadata

Author and affiliation: indicate status and institutional affiliation.
Abstract: 1,000 characters maximum, including spaces.
Keywords: 5 to 6.
Languages: French, English, Spanish. Abstracts and keywords in all three languages, plus, optionally, in a fourth language chosen by the author

Text

Title levels: indicate titles 1, 2, 3, 4 using the menu palette;
Bibliographical references: to be included in the text, according to APA standards;
Complete bibliography at the end of the text (according to APA standards).

Illustrations

figure references in the text;
provide illustrations in .jpeg format in a separate folder;
also provide a Word file with titles, captions and credits.