Peer Review Process
All articles submitted to Alternation are subjected to a blind peer-review process. Each article is reviewed by at least two independent peer reviewers.
Pre-review Desktop Moderation: The pre-review desktop moderation is conducted by the Editor-in-Chief, Managing Editor and/ or Guest Editor(s). This moderation ensures that the article submissions to be sent for review fit the focus and scope of Alternation and comply with the Alternation Author submission guidelines.
The Editor-in-Chief, Managing Editor or respective appointed guest editor(s) will select a reviewer from the pool of reviewers, and send the article, together with the Alternation Article Review Form to the reviewer. The reviewer must do the review and submit the report to the relevant editor within six weeks.
The editor(s) will then inform the author(s) of the article, whether the article has been accepted for publication or not. In the event that it is not approved for publication by one reviewer, the editor will identify a third reviewer for the article, who equally have a maximum of six weeks for producing the review.
The relevant editor will also submit an appropriate abstract of the review report to the author(s) of the article, indicating the improvements or changes to the article needed before publication. If there are suggested improvements or changes suggested by a reviewer that the author(s) do not want to accommodate, they need to state that with reason(s) to the editor.
The criteria by which reviewers are asked to judge submissions, are listed under Review Guidelines.
All associates of the respective Alternation Research Group must register on OJS Alternation as reviewers, if they so wish. Experts in the field of the study of the Arts and Humanities or those adjudged to be sufficiently knowledgeable of the field, and who wish to also function as reviewers, must likewise register as reviewers.