JHUP Journals Ethics and Malpractice Statement
JHUP Journals Ethics and Malpractice Statement can be found here.
Peer Review Policy
Diacritics welcomes submissions from scholars at all stages of their careers. We are especially interested in new work that engages creatively and rigorously with literary, philosophical, visual, filmic or cultural texts of any historical period. We agree to review original work that has not been previously published—either in print or online—and submissions should not be under consideration elsewhere. We do occasionally publish translations of essays originally published in languages other than English.
All essays published in Diacritics have first gone through double anonymous peer review. We make every effort to ensure the anonymity of authors and referees and ask that authors remove all self-identifying references. The identity of the author is not revealed to referees, and the editors do not know the identity of the author until a decision has been reached. Submissions are first read and ranked by an editorial board committee. Authors of submissions that are not recommended for further evaluation will receive notification, which does not include formal reader reports, usually within six weeks.
Those essays chosen for outside review are sent to referees with the appropriate expertise. Submissions are evaluated by scholars around the world—referees need not have any affiliation with Cornell or the Diacritics editorial board. We do not ask referees to complete any forms or to respond to particular categories such as “accept without revisions, “revise and resubmit” and so on. Many of our referees do offer substantive feedback on the essays they read. The final decision to accept or decline an essay is left to the Diacritics editorial board. On average the review process takes from three to six months.