Peer review

Reviewing procedure

1. All articles submitted to the Kantian Journal that meet the above formal requirements are subject to double-blind peer review. A review submitted by the research supervisor or any other expert together with an article is not a substitute for peer review.

2. Editor-in-chief conducts a primary evaluation of the submission and directs it for double-blind peer review to a specialist, holding a degree and possessing expertise in the relevant area of Kant, Neo-Kantian or Enlightenment studies.

3.  The time period for peer review is established by the editor-in-chief, whose responsibility is to minimise the lag between submission and the editorial decision on publication. The whole reviewing process usually takes about two months.

4. The peer review covers the following topics:

a. Correspondence of the title to the content of the article;

b. Topicality of the article, its correspondence to most recent developments in the field;

c. Accessibility of the article to the target audience in terms of language, style, layout etc.;

d. Novelty of the article in comparison to previously published literature;

e. Other positive and negative features of the article that could be developed or corrected by the author;

f. Recommendation to publish or to decline publication.

For more information see the Blind ReviewForm.

5. Peer review is confidential. The author receives the text of the review. Confidentiality is breached only in cases of plagiarism or falsification charges by the reviewer. 

6. Should the reviewer recommend reworking the article, his/her recommendations are delivered to the author with a suggestion for revision. It is the author’s right to defend his/her position before the Editorial Board and the reviewer. A revised article is resubmitted for review. 

7. An article that is not recommended for publication by the reviewer is not accepted for resubmission. Text of the review is sent to the author via e-mail, fax or regular mail. 

8. A positive review is a necessary but not sufficient condition for publication. The Editorial Board makes the final decision. 

9. If a  positive decision is made, the secretary notifies the author and informs him/her about time of publication. 

10. The Editorial Board keeps the reviews for five years.