Guide for reviewers

We are delighted that you have agreed to serve as a reviewer for Arts & Aesthetics. Your expertise and thoughtful critique are invaluable to the journal’s mission of advancing scholarship in the fields of art, aesthetics, and visual culture. As a reviewer, your primary role is to provide constructive, unbiased feedback to help ensure that the manuscripts published in Arts & Aesthetics meet the highest scholarly standards.

   The following guidelines will help you navigate your responsibilities as a reviewer and support you in offering insightful and fair evaluations.

Confidentiality

Confidentiality is a cornerstone of the peer review process. All manuscripts submitted for review are confidential and should not be shared or discussed with others without prior permission from the editorial team. Reviewers should not use the information from the manuscripts for personal gain or advantage.

Impartiality and Objectivity

Your review should be based solely on the academic quality and merit of the manuscript. Avoid any personal biases or conflicts of interest. If you have any relationships with the author(s) that may affect your impartiality, please notify the editorial team immediately so that an alternative reviewer may be appointed.

Constructive Feedback

The goal of the review process is to help authors improve their manuscripts. Your feedback should be constructive, specific, and actionable. While it is important to point out areas for improvement, it is equally crucial to highlight the strengths of the manuscript. When identifying weaknesses, provide clear suggestions on how the author can address these issues. Focus on:

• Clarity and Coherence: Is the argument clearly presented? Are there any ambiguities or sections that need further clarification?
• Theoretical and Conceptual Framework: Does the paper engage effectively with existing scholarship? Are the theoretical concepts well-defined and integrated into the paper?
• Methodology (if applicable): Is the research methodology sound and well-explained? Does it align with the goals of the paper?
• Relevance and Contribution: Does the paper make a meaningful contribution to the field of art, aesthetics, or visual culture? Does it introduce new ideas, challenge existing perspectives, or offer innovative insights?
• Writing Quality: Is the paper well-written, with proper organization, grammar, and style? Are there any issues with spelling, punctuation, or formatting that need attention?

Review Structure

When preparing your review, please address the following key areas:

• Summary: Begin your review with a brief summary of the paper’s main argument, themes, and findings (for empirical work). This ensures that the editorial team and the author(s) know you have carefully read the manuscript.
• Strengths: Highlight the positive aspects of the manuscript. This could include the originality of the research, the quality of writing, the relevance of the topic, or the rigor of the analysis.
• Weaknesses: Identify any weaknesses in the manuscript. Be specific in your critique and suggest ways in which the author could improve the paper. Avoid vague comments such as “the paper is unclear” or “more research is needed.” Instead, provide concrete suggestions, such as “the introduction could better articulate the paper’s thesis” or “the conclusion would benefit from a discussion of the broader implications of the findings.”
• Recommendation: After addressing the strengths and weaknesses, provide your overall recommendation regarding the manuscript’s suitability for publication. Your options are typically:
• Accept: The manuscript is suitable for publication without revisions (rarely used).
• Minor Revisions: The manuscript requires minor adjustments before it can be accepted.
• Major Revisions: The manuscript requires significant changes, but it may be suitable for publication after substantial revisions.
• Reject: The manuscript does not meet the journal’s standards for publication and should be declined.

Your recommendation should be based on the paper's academic merit and its alignment with the scope of the journal.

Timeliness

Please aim to complete your review within the specified time frame (usually 2-3 weeks from the date you receive the manuscript). If for any reason you are unable to meet the deadline or cannot complete the review, please inform the editorial team promptly so that they can find an alternative reviewer.

Ethical Considerations

When reviewing a manuscript, it is important to be mindful of ethical issues that may arise during the review process. These may include concerns about plagiarism, data manipulation, or the misuse of sources. If you suspect any ethical violations, please bring these to the attention of the editorial team.

Conflict of Interest

If you have any personal, professional, or financial conflicts of interest with the manuscript or the author(s), please notify the editorial team immediately. In such cases, it is best to recuse yourself from reviewing the manuscript to ensure fairness and transparency.

Final Thoughts

Your role as a reviewer is essential to the integrity of the academic publishing process. Your constructive feedback not only helps authors improve their work but also strengthens the quality of research and scholarship in the field of arts and aesthetics. The editorial team at Arts & Aesthetics values your time, expertise, and commitment to advancing the discourse in these vital areas.

We are grateful for your contribution to our journal and look forward to your thoughtful and thorough reviews.