The Review Process
Two referees. No names.
A written report either way.
The value of a journal is entirely in what it declines to publish. This page sets out exactly how that decision is made, so that an author can judge whether the verdict was earned.
The Four Stages
-
Editorial screen
Within two weeks of receipt, an editor reads every submission once. We are checking three things: that the paper advances an argument rather than summarising a topic, that it engages primary or scholarly sources directly, and that it falls within our disciplines.
Papers that fail the screen receive a short written explanation of which of the three conditions was not met. This stage removes roughly 15 percent of submissions; the screen is a filter for scope and form, not a judgement on the argument.
-
Double-blind referee reading
Surviving papers go to two referees training toward expertise in the paper’s own subject. Every referee has graduated from, or currently attends, a university ranked in the top twenty of the U.S. News & World Report National Universities rankings, and is matched to submissions in their field of study.
Referees receive the manuscript with the author’s name, school, and country removed, and work independently — neither knows who the other referee is, or what they concluded. Authors are never told who read their paper.
Each returns a written report addressing the argument, the handling of evidence, the engagement with existing scholarship, and the clarity of the prose, and recommends accept or decline.
-
Adjudication, where the referees disagree
Where both referees reach the same recommendation, that recommendation stands. Where they disagree substantively, the paper goes to a third referee in the same field, who reads it blind and without sight of the first two reports, and settles the question either way.
-
Decision and publication
The editors issue the decision together with every report the paper received. Accepted papers are copy-edited for house style, checked for citation accuracy, and sent to the author for approval before publication. Nothing appears under an author’s name that the author has not signed off.
What Referees Are Asked
- Claim
- Is there a thesis that could, in principle, be wrong? Is it stated?
- Evidence
- Does the evidence presented actually support the claim made, or a weaker one?
- Sources
- Are primary and scholarly sources used, interpreted, and cited accurately?
- Scholarship
- Does the author know what has already been written, and respond to it?
- Objection
- What is the strongest objection, and does the paper meet it or avoid it?
- Contribution
- Does a reader learn something they could not get from a textbook?
- Prose
- Is the argument legible? Does the structure serve it?
Timeline
- 15 September 2026
- Submission deadline, 23:59 UTC
- Early October
- Editorial screen concluded; authors notified whether their paper continues to referee reading or is returned
- October – November
- Double-blind referee reading and third-referee adjudication where necessary
- 1 December 2026
- Decision issued to every author, with both referee reports in full
- Winter 2027
- Volume I, Issue II published
Fast-track authors receive their decision and both referee reports within 14 days of their own submission date rather than waiting for these round-wide dates — see fast-track review.
Volume I, Issue III opens for submissions in early February 2027. Exact dates will be announced on the Submit page.
On Rejection
Every author receives their referee reports in full — including the authors we decline. The reading is the thing we are actually offering.Editorial Policy — Volume I
Serving as a Referee
We are building the referee pool continuously. If you study a field we publish and attend — or have graduated from — a top-twenty national university, we would like to hear from you.
Referees read one to three papers per cycle and return a report of roughly 400–800 words. Referees are paid for their time; this is part of what the submission fee funds. The commitment is real but bounded, and it is the single most useful thing anyone can do for a student writing seriously for the first time.