Peer Review Process
All manuscripts submitted to the Manuscripta Orientalia are peer-reviewed according to the following procedure.
Initial review: The Editor-in-Chief evaluates each manuscript to determine if its topic and content is suitable for consideration by the Manuscripta Orientalia. Manuscripts that do not meet minimum criteria are returned to the authors within one week of receipt. This is in the best interest of the authors who could then decide to either correct the problems or to submit the manuscript to a more appropriate venue, avoiding delays from a lengthy review process that would nonetheless lead to rejection.
Peer review: In case the manuscript passes the initial review the Editor-in-Chief selects two referees based on their expertise in that particular field. Each manuscript is reviewed by at least two referees under a double-blind peer review process, where both the referees and the authors are kept anonymous. Referees are asked to evaluate the manuscript based on its originality, soundness of methodology. To facilitate timely publication, referees are asked to complete their reviews within one month.
Recommendation: Based on the referees' comments the Editor-in-Chief makes a final decision on the acceptability of the manuscript and communicates to the authors the decision. The final decision can be “Accept Submission”, “Revisions Required”, “Resubmit for Review”, or “Decline Submission”. A revised manuscript should be re-submitted within six months of the decision. It will usually be returned to the original referees for evaluation.
Double-Blind Peer Review Guidelines
Manuscripta Orientalia uses double-blind review, which means that both the reviewer and author identities are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa, throughout the review process.
To facilitate this, authors need to ensure that their manuscripts are prepared in a way that does not give away their identity. To help with this preparation please ensure the following when submitting to Manuscripta Orientalia.
Submit the Title Page containing the Authors details and Blinded Manuscript with no author details as two separate files.
How to prepare the Title Page
This should include the title, authors' names and affiliations, and a complete address for the corresponding author including telephone and e-mail address.
How to help prepare the Blinded Manuscript
Besides the obvious need to remove names and affiliations under the title within the manuscript, there are other steps that need to be taken to ensure the manuscript is correctly prepared for double-blind peer review. To assist with this process the key items that need to be observed are as follows:
- Use the third person to refer to work the Authors have previously undertaken, e.g. replace any phrases like “as we have shown before” with “…has been shown before [Anonymous, 2015]”.
- Make sure figures do not contain any affiliation related identifier.
- Do not eliminate essential self-references or other references but limit self-references only to papers that are relevant for those reviewing the submitted paper.
- Cite papers published by the Author in the text as follows: “[Anonymous, 2015]”.
- For blinding in the reference list: “[Anonymous 2015] Details omitted for double-blind reviewing”.
- Remove references to funding sources.
- Do not include acknowledgments.
- Name your files with care and ensure document properties are also anonymized.
Criteria for Publication
For a manuscript to be published in Manuscripta Orientalia, it must meet four criteria:
- Soundness of methodology
- Importance to design researchers
- Relevance to design practices
Honest and Polite
After each round of the review, review reports are sent to the author(s) and all reviewers of the manuscript under consideration. It is important for a reviewer to be honest but not offensive when providing comments. Review reports with opinions expressed in a kind and constructive way will more effectively persuade the authors on the merit of the review.