Peer Review Process

Articles submitted to Information & Culture are initially reviewed by the editors, who determine whether the manuscript will be sent to outside reviewers. If chosen for review, the manuscript is then evaluated in a double-blind process by at least two and usually three outside reviewers, including members of the journal's Editorial Advisory Board, and/or other experts in relevant fields as selected by the editors. This peer review process is designed to ensure that Information & Culture publishes only original, accurate, and timely articles that contribute new knowledge, insights or valuable perspectives to our discipline.

 


Evaluation

Reviewers play a vital role in ensuring the quality of papers published in the journal.

Questions addressed by reviewers include:

    • Is the topic within the scope of the journal?
    • Is the topic significant or sufficiently interesting to warrant publication?
    • Is the scholarship adequately documented and is relevant literature reviewed?
    • Are the research aims and any methodological choices made by author clear and justified?
    • Is the article well organized and clearly written?

    Reviewers make one of three recommendations: acceptance, acceptance with revision, rejection. Reviewers are asked to include comments explaining the recommendationand to provide authors with suitable feedback to improve the article. Our aim is to create a constructive process that benefits the journal and the authors while respecting the time and efforts of all volunteer reviewers.

     


    Review timetable

    We understand that the timeliness of decisions and publication is a major concern of authors. The typical manuscript is reviewed by one of the editors and sent out to reviewers within a couple of weeks after submission. Reviewers typically have six weeks to prepare their review (a second round of reviews may be solicited if the initial reviewers disagree). Then a couple of weeks are typically required to reconcile reviewer comments (and identify any significant copyediting issues for papers that were accepted or accepted with slight revisions). Thus, it is quite possible that an author could hear back in less than two months from the time of submission. However, the realities of the peer-review process sometimes extend our timeline. You will receive a response as expeditiously as possible. If you are seeking publication for a tenure packet, please allow for ample review time and let us know this is a consideration. Authors receive the reviewers’ comments and are often asked to revise the manuscript in line with the reviewers’ and/or editor’s suggestions. If the revised article is accepted for publication, the editor then determines the journal issue in which it will appear. Authors can help speed the process by ensuring they follow the submission requirements and, if accepted, addressing the reviewers comments and any copy-editing requirements in a timely fashion.

     


    Acceptance rate

    • March 2018 to February 2019: 21%
    • March 2017 to February 2018: 23%
    • March 2016 to February 2017: 38.5%
    • March 2015 to February 2016: 35%
    • March 2014 to February 2015: 49%
    • March 2013 to February 2014: 32%