Peer Review Process
The rigorous double-blind peer review process serves to ensure the high academic standards of Aethiopica. All contributions will be evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief in consultation with the editorial board as to their suitability within the scope of the journal and to the adherence to the Author Guidelines. If a contribution does not pass the initial scrutiny process, either it will be rejected immediately or advice regarding a revision of the manuscript will be offered.
Upon recommendation by the editorial board, the submitted papers are sent for review to one up to three independent reviewers who are specialists in the same research area as the author(s). As the review process is a double-blind procedure, only a review version of the manuscript with all identifying information removed will be sent to the reviewers as a secure pdf-file.
Whilst the editorial office will make every effort to deal with submissions as quickly as possible, it should be remembered that all reviewers work on a voluntary basis. We recommend that the peer reviewers respond within two months but this cannot always be taken for granted. Each reviewer is expected to provide an assessment of the paper and to send a review report with a clear recommendation. The editorial team will then take care of summarising the feedback and send it in an anonymous form to the author(s). Apart from purely formal aspects, the manuscript can be evaluated either as (a) accepted as it is, (b) accepted with minor revisions, (c) to be resubmitted with major revisions, or (d) rejected.
All authors are asked to retain a copy of the manuscript in the exact format submitted, since editorial comments sometimes refer to specific pages and lines in the original.
Information for Peer-reviewers
The peer review process is a rigorous, unbiased and constructive process of blind expert evaluation of manuscripts. Reviewers should not seek to identify the authors they are reviewing nor should they identify themselves. If the invited reviewer perceives to have a potential conflict of interest, they should immediately notify the editors. It may be useful for reviewers to consult the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) ‘Cope Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers’ (September 2017, http://publicationethics.org/files/Peer%20review%20guidelines.pdf).