<p>Prezados autores,</p>
<p>Primeiramente agradecemos a submissão do artigo "VIRTUAL MEDIA AND MENTAL HEALTH DURING SOCIAL DISTANCEMENT IMPOSED BY THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC: CHALLENGES IN PUBLIC HEALTH" à Revista Interamericana de Psicología/Interamerican Journal of Psychology.</p>
<p>Apesar da relevância e pertinência da discussão proposta, os avaliadores solicitaram extensas reformulações no manuscrito. A partir deste indicativo, a decisão editorial é de <strong>recusa</strong> do artigo.&nbsp;</p>
<p>Estamos à disposição para iniciar uma nova tramitação, caso seja de seu interesse, quando o artigo for modificado de forma a atender aos pedidos de revisão.</p>
<p>Atenciosamente,</p>
<p>Rodrigo Miranda</p>
<p>Editor Associado - Revista Interamericana de Psicología<br><br>------------------------------------------------------<br>Reviewer A:<br>Recommendation: Decline Submission<br><br>------------------------------------------------------<br><br></p>
<p>Does the abstract provide the main purposes of the study?</p>
<blockquote>Agree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the abstract provide what conditions, if any, were participants exposed?</p>
<blockquote>Agree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the abstract provide what type of design was used?</p>
<blockquote>Agree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the abstract provide main findings and conclusions?</p>
<blockquote>Agree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>What is your overall rating of the abstract?</p>
<blockquote>Satisfactory</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the introduction provide the background and context for the study?</p>
<blockquote>Agree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the introduction provide what in current theory, research, or clinical work makes this study useful, important, or of interest?</p>
<blockquote>Undecided</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the introduction provide what is different or special about the study in focus, methods, or design to address a need in the area?</p>
<blockquote>Undecided</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the introduction provide a clear the rationale regarding the constructs to be assessed?</p>
<blockquote>Undecided</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the introduction provide what specifically were the purposes, predictions, or hypotheses?</p>
<blockquote>Undecided</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>What is you overall rating of the introduction?</p>
<blockquote>Good</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide who were the participants and how many of them were there in this study?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide why was this sample selected in light of the research goals?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide how was this sample obtained, recruited, and selected?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide what are the participant (s) demographic characteristics of the sample (e.g., gender, age, ethnicity, race, socioeconomic status)? What if any inclusion and exclusion criteria were invoked (i.e., selection rules to obtain participants)?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide how many of those participants eligible or recruited actually were selected and participated in the study?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide if and it was informed consent solicited? How and from whom, if special populations were used?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide what is the design (e.g., longitudinal, cross-sectional, relationship, comparison) and how does the design relate to the goals of the study?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide&nbsp;how were participants assigned to groups or conditions?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide how many groups were included in the design?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide how were the groups similar and different in how they were treated in the study?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide why were these groups critical to address the questions of interest?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide the constructs of interest and how were they measured?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide the relevant reliability and validity data from previous research (and from the present study) that support the use of these measures for the present purposes?</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide multiple measures and methods used to assess the constructs?</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide response sets or styles relevant to the use and interpretation of the measures?</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide how was the assessment conducted? By whom (as assessors/observers)? In what order were the measures administered?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide if raters were used in any facet of assessment, what is the reliability (inter- or intrajudge consistency) in rendering their judgments/ratings?</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide where was the study conducted (setting)?</p>
<blockquote>Undecided</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide what materials, equipment, or apparatuses were used in the study?</p>
<blockquote>Undecided</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide what was the chronological sequence of events to which participants were exposed?</p>
<blockquote>Undecided</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide what intervals elapsed between different aspects of the study (e.g., assessment occasions)?</p>
<blockquote>Undecided</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide what procedural checks were completed to avert potential sources of bias in implementation of the manipulation and assessments?</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide what checks were made to ensure that the conditions were carried out as intended?</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide what other information does the reader need to know to understand how participants were treated and what conditions were provided?</p>
<blockquote>Undecided</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>What is your overall rating of the methodology?</p>
<blockquote>Poor</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the results provide the primary measures and data on which the predictions depend?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the results provide the scores on the measures of interest for the different groups and sample as a whole (e.g., measures of central tendency and variability)?</p>
<p>Does the results provide how the scores compare with those of other study, normative, or standardization samples?</p>
<p>Does the results provide the groups of interest within the study similar on measures and variables that could interfere with interpretation of the hypotheses?</p>
<p>Does the results provide the analyses were used and how specifically did these address the original hypotheses and purposes?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the results provide the assumptions of the data analyses met?</p>
<blockquote>Undecided</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the results provide if multiple tests were used, what means were provided to control error rates?</p>
<p>Does the results provide if more than one group was delineated, were they similar on variables that might otherwise explain the results (e.g., diagnosis, age)?</p>
<p>Does the results provide if data was missing due to incomplete measures (not filled out completely by the participants) or due to loss of participants? If so, how were these handled in the data analyses?</p>
<p>Does the results provide ancillary analyses that might further inform the primary analyses or exploratory analyses that might stimulate further work?</p>
<p>What is your overall rating of the results?</p>
<blockquote>Poor</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the discussion provide what were the major findings of the study?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the results provide how do these findings add to research and how do they support, refute, or inform current theory? What alternative interpretations can be placed on the data?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the results provide what limitations or qualifiers must be placed on the study given methodology and design issues? What research follows from the study to move the field forward?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>What is your overall rating of the Discussion?</p>
<blockquote>Poor</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Is the manuscript well written, grammatically correct, free of spelling errors, cohesive, and logically organized?</p>
<blockquote>Undecided</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Are conclusions stated clearly?</p>
<blockquote>Undecided</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Do the author(s) appropriately reference primary and secondary sources using the APA publication manual?</p>
<blockquote>Agree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Please provide a narrative</p>
<p>Suggested guidelines for narrative review:</p>
<ul>
<li class="show">Do not indicate recommendation for publication</li>
<li class="show">Do not include reviewer-identifying information</li>
<li class="show">Narrative should serve as constructive guidance for author, serve a mentoring function to help author identify ways to improve/orient the paper appropriately for this journal</li>
<li class="show">Suggested structure:
<ul>
<li class="show">Summarize paper (1-2 sentences)</li>
<li class="show">Overall strengths and areas for improvement and recommendations including what excites or interests the reviewer, what the paper might potentially contribute to the literature</li>
<li class="show">Specific recommendations (this section should be clearly organized and allow the author to specifically address the concerns) for example, how the manuscript could be more relevant to the Interamerican Psychology.</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
<blockquote>O artigo “Mídias virtuais e a saúde mental durante distanciamento social imposto pela pandemia da COVID-19: desafios na saúde pública” apresenta como objetivo discutir os tipos de informações veiculadas nas mídias e suas possíveis influências na saúde mental da população.<br>O artigo faz uma boa contextualização da COVID-19 no que concerne ao seu aparecimento e desenvolvimento até o momento. No entanto, existem pontos bastante problemáticos destacados a seguir.<br>1. Existem alguns problemas de pontuação na redação do artigo. Isso dificulta a devida compreensão dos argumentos. Sugere-se uma revisão cautelosa da Língua Portuguesa.<br>2. No início do artigo são anunciadas algumas das implicações do distanciamento social e de questões amplas importantes: redução da renda familiar, redução do contato físico e social com as demais pessoas, intensificação das relações familiares. No entanto, o artigo acaba se encaminhando para uma discussão individualista no que concerne à saúde mental, veja-se as discussões sobre “reflexão” e “autoconsciência”. Esse ponto, muito embora seja um elemento a ser considerado, foge ao que o artigo parece se propor, isto é: os desafios na saúde pública.<br>3. Sobre a saúde pública: esse termo aparece somente em 6 ocasiões: no título, nas palavras-chave, na linha 36 da página 1 (primeiro parágrafo da introdução) e em 3 referências dizendo respeito ao nome do periódico em que está disponível o texto consultado. Por sua vez, a menção ao Sistema Único de Saúde aparece apenas 2 vezes, das quais: a 1ª é para indicar a situação de desinvestimento nessa política pública (p. 5, parágrafo 5, linha 36); a 2ª fala sobre a Rede de Atenção Psicossocial (RAPS), apenas a título de informação sobre oferecimento de suporte e tratamento psicológico (p. 7, parágrafo 3, linha 28). Essa situação leva a questionar: como um texto que se propõe a discutir os tipos de informações veiculadas nas mídias, a partir da análise das possíveis influências na saúde mental da população e os desafios para a saúde pública não realiza problematizações sobre: a questão da saúde pública? Sobre o próprio SUS? Ademais, em nenhum momento no texto se define o que é saúde mental o que implica a compreensão equivocada, dado o rumo que o texto toma, de que ela é um elemento individual, essencial e intrínseco aos sujeitos. Essa situação leva a indagar, ainda, sobre a validade de se perguntar sobre os possíveis efeitos dessas notícias na saúde mental, uma vez que se tem uma imprecisão nas definições.<br>4. No que diz respeito à metodologia, muito embora se explicite que a pesquisa foi realizada em 3 plataformas durante o mês de abril, não é possível saber quais notícias/informações foram tratadas. Na pergunta norteadora, a questão sobre a saúde pública, simplesmente, desaparece.<br>5. Por fim, os autores não deixam claro, ou fundamentam as relações entre a saúde pública e as mídias, uma vez que não discutem a saúde mental como um elemento produzido pelo social e suas dimensões culturais, políticas, econômicas; mas individualizam a saúde mental.</blockquote>
<p>Based on the answers to these questions what is your&nbsp;disposition&nbsp;for the manuscript?</p>
<blockquote>Reject:</blockquote>
<p><br>------------------------------------------------------<br><br><br><br>------------------------------------------------------<br>Reviewer B:<br>Recommendation: Decline Submission<br><br>------------------------------------------------------<br><br></p>
<p>Does the abstract provide the main purposes of the study?</p>
<blockquote>Agree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the abstract provide what conditions, if any, were participants exposed?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the abstract provide what type of design was used?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the abstract provide main findings and conclusions?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>What is your overall rating of the abstract?</p>
<blockquote>Poor</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the introduction provide the background and context for the study?</p>
<blockquote>Agree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the introduction provide what in current theory, research, or clinical work makes this study useful, important, or of interest?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the introduction provide what is different or special about the study in focus, methods, or design to address a need in the area?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the introduction provide a clear the rationale regarding the constructs to be assessed?</p>
<blockquote>Undecided</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the introduction provide what specifically were the purposes, predictions, or hypotheses?</p>
<blockquote>Agree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>What is you overall rating of the introduction?</p>
<blockquote>Satisfactory</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide who were the participants and how many of them were there in this study?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide why was this sample selected in light of the research goals?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide how was this sample obtained, recruited, and selected?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide what are the participant (s) demographic characteristics of the sample (e.g., gender, age, ethnicity, race, socioeconomic status)? What if any inclusion and exclusion criteria were invoked (i.e., selection rules to obtain participants)?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide how many of those participants eligible or recruited actually were selected and participated in the study?</p>
<blockquote>Undecided</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide if and it was informed consent solicited? How and from whom, if special populations were used?</p>
<blockquote>Agree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide what is the design (e.g., longitudinal, cross-sectional, relationship, comparison) and how does the design relate to the goals of the study?</p>
<blockquote>Strongly Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide&nbsp;how were participants assigned to groups or conditions?</p>
<blockquote>Undecided</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide how many groups were included in the design?</p>
<blockquote>Undecided</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide how were the groups similar and different in how they were treated in the study?</p>
<blockquote>Undecided</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide why were these groups critical to address the questions of interest?</p>
<blockquote>Undecided</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide the constructs of interest and how were they measured?</p>
<blockquote>Strongly Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide the relevant reliability and validity data from previous research (and from the present study) that support the use of these measures for the present purposes?</p>
<blockquote>Strongly Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide multiple measures and methods used to assess the constructs?</p>
<blockquote>Strongly Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide response sets or styles relevant to the use and interpretation of the measures?</p>
<blockquote>Strongly Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide how was the assessment conducted? By whom (as assessors/observers)? In what order were the measures administered?</p>
<blockquote>Strongly Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide if raters were used in any facet of assessment, what is the reliability (inter- or intrajudge consistency) in rendering their judgments/ratings?</p>
<blockquote>Strongly Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide where was the study conducted (setting)?</p>
<blockquote>Strongly Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide what materials, equipment, or apparatuses were used in the study?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide what was the chronological sequence of events to which participants were exposed?</p>
<blockquote>Strongly Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide what intervals elapsed between different aspects of the study (e.g., assessment occasions)?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide what procedural checks were completed to avert potential sources of bias in implementation of the manipulation and assessments?</p>
<blockquote>Strongly Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide what checks were made to ensure that the conditions were carried out as intended?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the methodology provide what other information does the reader need to know to understand how participants were treated and what conditions were provided?</p>
<blockquote>Strongly Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>What is your overall rating of the methodology?</p>
<blockquote>Poor</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the results provide the primary measures and data on which the predictions depend?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the results provide the scores on the measures of interest for the different groups and sample as a whole (e.g., measures of central tendency and variability)?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the results provide how the scores compare with those of other study, normative, or standardization samples?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the results provide the groups of interest within the study similar on measures and variables that could interfere with interpretation of the hypotheses?</p>
<blockquote>Undecided</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the results provide the analyses were used and how specifically did these address the original hypotheses and purposes?</p>
<blockquote>Strongly Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the results provide the assumptions of the data analyses met?</p>
<blockquote>Strongly Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the results provide if multiple tests were used, what means were provided to control error rates?</p>
<blockquote>Undecided</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the results provide if more than one group was delineated, were they similar on variables that might otherwise explain the results (e.g., diagnosis, age)?</p>
<blockquote>Undecided</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the results provide if data was missing due to incomplete measures (not filled out completely by the participants) or due to loss of participants? If so, how were these handled in the data analyses?</p>
<blockquote>Undecided</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the results provide ancillary analyses that might further inform the primary analyses or exploratory analyses that might stimulate further work?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>What is your overall rating of the results?</p>
<blockquote>Poor</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the discussion provide what were the major findings of the study?</p>
<blockquote>Strongly Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the results provide how do these findings add to research and how do they support, refute, or inform current theory? What alternative interpretations can be placed on the data?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Does the results provide what limitations or qualifiers must be placed on the study given methodology and design issues? What research follows from the study to move the field forward?</p>
<blockquote>Strongly Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>What is your overall rating of the Discussion?</p>
<blockquote>Poor</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Is the manuscript well written, grammatically correct, free of spelling errors, cohesive, and logically organized?</p>
<blockquote>Agree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Are conclusions stated clearly?</p>
<blockquote>Disagree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Do the author(s) appropriately reference primary and secondary sources using the APA publication manual?</p>
<blockquote>Agree</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Please provide a narrative</p>
<p>Suggested guidelines for narrative review:</p>
<ul>
<li class="show">Do not indicate recommendation for publication</li>
<li class="show">Do not include reviewer-identifying information</li>
<li class="show">Narrative should serve as constructive guidance for author, serve a mentoring function to help author identify ways to improve/orient the paper appropriately for this journal</li>
<li class="show">Suggested structure:
<ul>
<li class="show">Summarize paper (1-2 sentences)</li>
<li class="show">Overall strengths and areas for improvement and recommendations including what excites or interests the reviewer, what the paper might potentially contribute to the literature</li>
<li class="show">Specific recommendations (this section should be clearly organized and allow the author to specifically address the concerns) for example, how the manuscript could be more relevant to the Interamerican Psychology.</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
<blockquote>The purpose is relevant and the manuscript is well written. The chosen methodoly is not appropriate to the purpose of the study. </blockquote>
<p>Based on the answers to these questions what is your&nbsp;disposition&nbsp;for the manuscript?</p>
<blockquote>Reject:</blockquote>
<p><br>------------------------------------------------------<br><br><br></p><br/><p>The following message is being delivered on behalf of Interamerican Journal of Psychology. _____________________________________________________________</p>
<div>
<div id="Zm-_Id_-Sgn" data-zbluepencil-ignore="true">
<div><strong><span class="size">Dr. Fernando Andres Polanco</span></strong></div>
<div><em>Editor Revista Interamericana de Psicología/Interamerican Journal of Psychology</em></div>
<div><a href="mailto:fernando.polanco@sipsych.org" target="_blank" rel="noopener">fernando.polanco@sipsych.org</a>&nbsp;</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Sociedad Interamericana de Psicología</div>
<div>Web:&nbsp;<a href="http://sipsych.org" target="_blank" rel="noopener">http://sipsych.org</a>&nbsp;</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div><a href="https://www.facebook.com/sipsych/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Facebook</a>&nbsp; |&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="https://twitter.com/sipsych" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Twitter</a> &nbsp;|&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="https://www.instagram.com/sipsych/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Instagram</a>&nbsp; |&nbsp; <a href="https://www.youtube.com/user/SIPChannel2013" target="_blank" rel="noopener">YouTube</a></div>
</div>
</div>