Time required for peer-reviewing:
Art Style Magazine’s editorial team is involved in the peer-review process for submitted extended essays and articles within the time required for the desired quality. This part of the process should take a minimum of 30 days and up to 90 days, from receipt of the paper until the editorial production begins for publication. We are highly dependent on the availability of reviewers, the appropriate reviewer for the subject and theme submitted, and the aspects related to acceptance or not due to conflicts of interest. Therefore, we count on our authors’ patience and understanding. If you need an update on how the process is going, please contact our editorial team.
To facilitate a consistent, fair, and timely review, the Art Style Magazine essentially considers the recommendations of COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics). Art Style Magazine outlines the best practice principles for publications.
The peer-review process is double-blind. The editors mediate all interactions between reviewers and authors, and peer reviews are not published. Instead, the review is facilitated by the editorial team of Art Style Magazine using the reviews received.
1. Submission of Paper by email.
2. Editorial Office Assessment
The Art Style Magazine’s editorial production checks the paper’s composition and arrangement against the Author Guidelines to make sure it includes the required sections and stylizations. The quality of the paper is not assessed at this point. All submitted papers that meet the criteria presented in the author guidelines are submitted to the step 3.
3. Appraisal by the Editor-in-Chief
The editor-in-chief checks if the paper is appropriate for the Art Style Magazine, its aims and scope, if it is sufficiently original and interesting, respecting good conduct of research publishing ethics. If its quality is very poor or if it does not align with the magazine’s requirements, it can be rejected at this stage. The editor-in-chief, Christiane Wagner, is certificated for peer review training and mentoring in the social sciences, arts and humanities by Web of Science Academy, Clarivate. Therefore, as the corresponding editor-in-chief, she will follow the process for the final decision guided by the recommendations of the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.
4. Invitation to Reviewers
The handling editor sends invitations to individuals he or she believes would be appropriate reviewers. As responses are received, further invitations are issued, if necessary, until the required number of acceptances is obtained—commonly this is two reviewers.
5. Art Style Magazine Evaluates the Reviews
The handling editor considers all the returned reviews before making an overall decision. If the reviews differ widely, the editor may invite an additional reviewer so as to get an extra opinion before making a decision.
6. Review is Conducted
The reviewer sets time aside to read the paper several times. The first read is used to form an initial impression of the work. If major problems are found at this stage, the reviewer may feel comfortable rejecting the paper without further work. Otherwise they will read the paper several more times, taking notes so as to build a detailed point-by-point review. The review is then submitted to the Art Style Magazine, with a recommendation to accept or reject it—or else with a request for revision (usually flagged as either major or minor) before it is reconsidered.
7. The Editor-in-Chief Evaluates the Reviews
The editor-in-chief considers all the returned reviews before making an overall decision. If the reviews differ widely, the editor-in-chief may invite an additional reviewer so as to get an extra opinion before making a decision. The peer reviewer abilities valued by the editor-in-chief are as follows: be qualified, have no conflicts of interest, provide constructive feedback, communicate clearly, and demonstrate reliability. In addition, the editor-in-chief wants to be sure that the content is being evaluated with qualified and fair analysis.
The editor-in-chief is ultimately responsible for the journal’s scholarly content. Her responsibility is to direct the magazine’s overall strategy and verify the quality of submitted articles to ensure the publication’s overall quality (see Council of Science Editors, Editor Roles and Responsibilities, Role of the Editor in Chief).
8. The Decision is Communicated
Deadlines and publication dates are designated in each respective issue’s planning stages. After the reviewers and editor-in-chief have evaluated the contributions, the editorial team will send the completed Art Style Magazine’s peer review form, getting back to the authors with acceptance or nonacceptance feedback, and inform them about the publication schedule.
9. Next Steps
If accepted, the paper is sent to the editorial production. If the article is rejected or sent back for either major or minor revision, the handling editor should include constructive comments from the reviewers to help the author improve the article. If the paper was sent back for revision, the reviewers should expect to receive a new version, unless they have opted out of further participation. Also, a paper can be rejected after completing revisions after peer review if the changes did not improve the paper enough for publication. However, where only minor changes were requested this follow-up review might be done by the handling editor.
For more information, see:
Papers submitted to Art Style Magazine are automatically checked for plagiarism; if a paper is plagiarized, it will not be accepted. All published articles go through the plagiarism scanner and must meet the ethical standards of academic conduct. If plagiarism is discovered in a published article, the plagiarized piece will be removed, and the author will no longer be able to publish in this magazine.