Editorial Policies

Editorial Policies

All submissions are initially assessed by an Editor-in-Chief, who decides whether the article fits the scope of the journal and meets basic norms of scholarly publishing. Submissions considered suitable for double-blind peer review are assigned to two reviewers whenever possible.

Based on the reviewer reports an Editor will accept the paper, reject the paper, or ask for revisions. Editorial responsibility rests with the journal’s Editors-in-Chief, supported by an expert, international Editorial Board.

Reviewer Guidelines

Reviewers are asked to address the following questions:

  • What are your overall impressions of the submission? Does it fit within the scope of the journal? What is your ultimate recommendation: accept, accept with revisions, revise and resubmit, or reject?
  • Please consider the originality, relevance and rigour of the submission and the author’s engagement with appropriate primary sources and secondary literature. Does the submission add something worth adding to the existing literature?
  • Is the manuscript well-structured and is the argument cogent? Is it accessible to the appropriate scholarly audiences?
  • Is the text well written and jargon free?


The journal strongly recommends that all authors submitting a paper register an account with Open Researcher and Contributor Identifier (ORCID). Registration provides a unique and persistent digital identifier for the account that enables accurate attribution and improves the discoverability of published papers, ensuring that the correct author receives the correct credit for their work. As the ORCID remains the same throughout the lifetime of the account, changes of name, affiliation, or research area do not affect the discoverability of an author's past work and aid correspondence with colleagues.

ORCID numbers should be added to the author data upon submission and will be published alongside the submitted paper, should it be accepted.

Competing Interests, Funding and Ethics 

To ensure transparency, all authors, reviewers and editors are required to declare any interests that could compromise, conflict or influence the validity of the publication. Competing interests guidelines can be viewed here.

In addition, authors are required to specify funding sources and detail requirements for ethical research in the submitted manuscript (see Author Guidelines).

Corrections and Retractions

In accordance with guidelines from the Committee on Publication Ethics (where applicable), the Press handles different kinds of error. All articles have their proofs checked prior to publication by the author/editor, which should ensure that content errors are not present. Please contact your editorial manager if an article needs correcting.

Post-publication changes are not permitted to the publication, unless in exceptional circumstances. If an error is discovered in a published article then the publisher will assess whether a Correction paper or Retraction is required. Please contact the editor for the full Correction/Retraction policy.

Misconduct and Complaints

Allegations of misconduct will be taken with utmost seriousness, regardless of whether those involved are internal or external to the journal, or whether the submission in question is pre- or post-publication. If an allegation of misconduct is made to the journal, it must be immediately passed on to the publisher, who will follow guidelines from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) on how to address the nature of the problem. Should the matter involve allegations against a member of the journal or publishing team, an independent and objective individual(s) may be sought to lead the investigation.

Should an author wish to lodge a complaint against an editorial decision or the editorial process in general they should first approach the Editor-in-Chief of the journal, explaining their complaint and ask for a reasoned response. Should this not be forthcoming or inadequate, they should raise the matter with the publisher, who will investigate the nature of the complaint and act as arbiter on whether the complaint should be upheld and investigated further. This will follow guidelines set out by COPE.