The JRAI’s editorial process for papers follows the below stages. Please note that the JRAI Special Issue undergoes a different editorial process due to the nature of it being a competition. More information on the editorial process of JRAI Special Issues can be found here.
1. Submission
Authors are asked to submit their papers via our online editorial system Editorial Manager. Find more information on how to submit here, and guidelines here.
2. Consulting the Editorial Board
The title and abstract of all papers are sent to all members of the Editorial Board, who comment on the paper’s fit to the journal and propose potential reviewers.
3. Consideration by the Editor
All papers are read by at least one member of the editorial team, and are each assigned to an Editor. On the basis of this reading and informed by the editorial board’s comments, an initial decision is made. We aim to make initial decisions within 5 weeks of submission.
4. First decision (pre-review)
We reject around 40% of submissions at this stage. Papers are rejected where they are judged to fall outside the core remit of the journal (see aims and scope here), where the anthropological contribution is insufficiently broad or unclear, and/or where the empirical basis is insufficiently robust or analytic nuance is lacking.
All non-rejected papers are sent for review.
5. Peer Review
The editorial team will consider selecting a maximum of one reviewer from those identified by the author (authors are given the opportunity to suggest reviewers as part of their submission). Additional reviewers are selected by the editors on the basis of editorial board suggestions and their own reading of the paper. We normally aim to solicit between 2-4 reviews depending on reviewer availability and the degree of consensus between these. Reviewers are asked to return reviews within 4 weeks. Unfortunately, delays can arise at this stage when reviewers decline invitations and/or are unable to return reviews within our target schedule.
6. Second decision (post-review)
When the reviews are received by the editorial team, we will make a decision on the paper. At this stage the possible outcomes are for papers to be: rejected, asked to revise and resubmit, accepted subject to minor revisions, or accepted. In practice, the latter is very rare following initial reviews. The most common outcomes at this stage are to revise and resubmit or to reject the paper. Where revisions are needed, reviews will always be accompanied by an editorial letter that sets out how these should be carried out.
7. Resubmission
Where revisions are requested, papers will be sent for further review after resubmission, unless the revisions are very minor. Commonly these will be returned to at least one of the initial reviewers. Additional reviews may also be sought, for instance if the focus of the paper has substantially shifted.
Stages 5-7 may be repeated until a final decision is reached.
8. Acceptance
If the paper is accepted (currently about 20% of submitted papers) it then enters the production process, involving copy-editing and proof reading. The time from acceptance to publication will vary, depending on the number of accepted papers.