Log in

Editorial Policies

Peer Review Process

All articles submitted to Open Library of Humanities are initially assessed by a Section Editor, who decides whether or not the article is suitable for peer review. Submissions considered suitable for peer review are assigned to one or more independent experts, who assess the article for clarity, validity, and sound methodology.

Open Library of Humanities operates a double-blind peer review process, meaning that authors and reviewers remain anonymous for the review process. We operate robust editorial standards, requiring two positive independent scholarly reviews by experts in the field(s), before articles can be considered for publication. Peer review usually takes 2-3 months although can, in exceptional cases, take longer for interdisciplinary articles requiring more than one Section Editor. Reviewers are asked to provide formative feedback, even if an article is not deemed suitable for publication in the journal.

Based on the reviewer reports, and in consultation with the Editors-in-Chief, the Section Editor will make a recommendation for rejection, minor or major revisions, or acceptance. Overall editorial responsibility rests with the journal's Editors-in-Chief, who are supported by an expert, international Editorial Board.

Section Policies