Peer Review Process

Articles submitted to Information & Culture: A Journal of History are initially reviewed by the editor, who determines whether the manuscript will be sent to outside reviewers. If so, it is then evaluated in a double blind process by at least two outside reviewers, including members of the journal's Editorial Advisory Board and/or other experts in relevant fields as selected by the editor. This peer review process is designed to assure that Information & Culture publishes only original, accurate, and timely articles that contribute to the understanding of the history of collections of recorded knowledge.

Evaluation: Reviewers are asked to assess submissions based on depth of original research, accuracy, historical perspective, appropriate documentation, readability, and suitability of content. (See reader report form.)

Questions addressed include:

  • Is the topic within the scope of the journal?
  • Is the topic significant and presented within a historical context?
  • Is the scholarship adequately documented?
  • Is the article well organized?

Reviewers make one of four recommendations: acceptance, acceptance with revision, rejection, or referral to another journal. Reviewers are asked to include comments explaining the recommendation.

Acceptance rate: With the change in the scope of the journal, we do not yet have enough data to make an accurate forecast of acceptance rates. For the period April 2011-March 2012 our acceptance rate was 20.5%. We anticipate that the acceptance rate will stabilize at well below 50 percent of submitted manuscripts.

Review timetable: The typical manuscript is reviewed by the editor 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 (difficulties in locating reviewers, slow reviewers, people's travel and vacation schedules, etc.) 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.