Peer Review
1. Initial Editorial Desk Review
Upon submission, the editorial team conducts an initial screening to verify that the submission is anonymized, falls within the journal’s scope, and fulfills basic formatting requirements: a single high-resolution image accompanied by a 300 to 500-word conceptual description.
2. Double-Blind Peer Review Process
To eliminate bias and maintain impartiality, the journal employs a double-blind peer review model:
- Author Anonymity: All identifying details, such as author name, institutional affiliation, and metadata, are removed from the image file and written text before being sent to the reviewers.
- Reviewer Anonymity: The identity of the peer reviewers remains confidential from the authors throughout and after the evaluation cycle.
- Focus on Merit: This mutual anonymity ensures that contributions are evaluated purely on visual innovation, theoretical grounding, and conceptual merit, and are not influenced by an author's profile, reputation, career stage, geographic location, or institutional standing.
3. Evaluation by a Global Panel of Experts
Submissions are assigned to independent reviewers selected from an international panel of experts across diverse art and design disciplines.
- Multidisciplinary Expertise: The panel comprises leading scholars, artists, designers, curators, design theorists, and art historians, whose collective knowledge spans contemporary practice and critical theory.
- Global Perspective: Drawing experts from institutions around the world ensures that the evaluation reflects international discourses, cultural nuances, and cross-disciplinary perspectives in contemporary art and design practice.
4. Recommendation and Editorial Decision
Reviewers assess the work based on established guidelines: visual innovation, conceptual engagement, visual-textual resonance, clarity as well as coherence, and provide feedback alongside a formal recommendation:
- Accept with or without minor/major revisions
- Revise and resubmit for further evaluation
- Reject
