JHUP Journals Ethics and Malpractice Statement
JHUP Journals Ethics and Malpractice Statement can be found here.
Peer Review Policy
The Journal of Orthodox Christian Studies accepts submissions of scholarly, research-based articles that contribute to the understanding of Orthodox Christianity from a broad range of academic perspectives: anthropological, cultural, literary, historical, political, social, theological. An initiative of the Orthodox Christian Studies Center at Fordham University, the journal will only consider single-submission essays that have not been previously published. Submissions are expected to reflect a working knowledge of the languages, primary sources, and current scholarship relevant to its topic. The journal’s editorial staff—including, in certain cases, members of its editorial board—initially review submissions in order to determine whether they meet the journal’s academic criteria and scope of interest. The editors reserve the right to decline an article for publication, or request revisions, prior to sending it out for review.
The Journal of Orthodox Christian Studies employs a double-blind peer review system. Once having passed through the initial review, articles are forwarded to at least two specialists in the field, who are asked to submit their reviews within two months. Neither the article’s author(s) nor the referees are privy to each other’s identities. Referees are asked to base their evaluations on the following criteria:
- quality of research and engagement of its given field and relevant sources
- contribution and relevance to the study of Orthodox Christianity broadly conceived
- originality, clarity, and presentation of argument
Based on these criteria, reviewers are asked to recommend whether the article should be:
- accepted for publication as is, or with minor revisions
- revised and resubmitted
- declined for publication
Reviews are recommendations, and the editors reserve the right to seek another review, should they deem it necessary. Similarly, in cases where the reviewer may not submit their evaluation in a timely manner, the editors may, at their discretion, base their decision on a single report. Generally, in the case of “accept with minor revisions,” the editors will work with authors to ensure that reviewers’ suggestions have been addressed, and the essay will not be sent out again for review. In the case of peer reviewers’ recommendations under the “revise and resubmit” rubric, the article, once revised by the author, will be sent again for a double-blind peer review to at least one referee (who may or may not be one of the original readers). For articles that are accepted under the “revise and resubmit” rubric in particular, the timetable of the review process can vary considerably, depending on the extent of expected revisions, the time authors take in making these revisions, and the promptness of reviewers’ evaluations.