The Society for Textual Scholarship

Responsibilities of the editor(s)

The editors’ chief responsibility is to determine which submissions to the journal will be published. They must ensure that decisions are made on the basis of the manuscript’s scholarly merit and the value of its contribution to ongoing critical and methodological conversations in the field.

Due to the risks associated with the use of Large Language Models (LLMs) and other generative AI tools—including, but not limited to, inaccuracy, bias, lack of or improper attribution, breaches of confidentiality, and other potential disruptions to the rigorous review process upon which academic scholarship depends—editors will not upload submissions to any generative AI systems. Editors may upload small units of text only to ensure that submissions do not contain substantial amounts of previously published material.

The editors ensure a culture of publication integrity through a rigorous peer review process that prioritizes original research, ethical methodologies, and factual and bibliographic accuracy. Concerns and/or grievances about publication practices should be addressed to the editor-in-chief, and will be reviewed by the editorial board before the publication of the subsequent issue.

Responsibilities of the author(s)

All essays and reviews submitted to the journal cannot have been previously published, nor can they be before another journal for consideration.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

• Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (see: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/us/) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work’s authorship and initial publication in this journal.
• Authors warrant that their submission is their own original work, and that they have the right to grant the rights contained in this license. Authors also warrant that their submission does not, to the best of their knowledge, infringe upon anyone’s copyright. If the submission contains material for which an author does not hold the copyright, authors warrant that they have obtained the unrestricted permission of the copyright owner to grant Indiana University the rights required by this license, and that such third-party owned material is clearly identified and acknowledged within the text or content of their submission.
• In preparing the essay or review for submission authors should follow the latest edition of the Chicago Manual of Style. A complete Style Sheet can be accessed on the Society for Textual Scholarship’s website: https://textualsociety.org/how-to-submit/.
• If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or to provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.
• Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal’s published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
• The journal acknowledges the instrumental usefulness and progress that ethical use of AI can bring to humanities scholarship. Authors may responsibly use AI generative tools for the purposes of developing ideas or polishing prose. However, authors are required to include a statement with their submission which acknowledges the specific AI tools they have used and in which specific ways. Human authors are responsible for the factual accuracy of work they submit. Should the journal editors determine that an author has not adequately disclosed their use of generative AI, the article will not enter into peer review or be published.
• Authors may not use AI generative tools for composing or substantively revising their works, or for producing charts, graphs, or other images. Textual Cultures reserves the right to deny publication in cases where authors are found to be in violation of this policy.

Peer Review process

The editors of Textual Cultures will first review all submissions for alignment with the journal’s mission and scope. Editors will recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors; instead, they will ask another member of the editorial board to handle the manuscript. If the editors feel that the submission is indeed within the purview of the journal, it will be assigned for review, through a double-blind process, to specialists in the field in which the author wishes to make a contribution—typically, two reviewers, who will independently evaluate the manuscript and recommend that it be rejected, revised for resubmission, or published as is. If the two reviewers disagree, the editors may decide one way or another or send the article out for a third review. Comments from reviewers will be reviewed by the editors and shared with the author, regardless of the decision to publish or not.

Purpose of peer review: The peer review process is a crucial component in helping the editor and/or editorial board reach editorial or publishing decisions and may also serve the author in improving the quality of the submission.

• Ethical standards / conflicts of interest for peer reviewers: A potential reviewer should withdraw from the review process if they have a conflict of interest with any of the authors, if they feel unqualified to assess the contribution, or if they cannot provide an assessment in a timely manner as defined by the editor.
• Confidentiality of peer review: Manuscripts for review are considered confidential documents. Information concerning a submitted manuscript will only be revealed to the corresponding author, reviewers, editorial board members, or the publisher as is required or otherwise appropriate.
• Objectivity: Reviewers should strive to be objective in their assessments. Reviewers should confirm that their review is based on the merits of the work and not influenced, either positively or negatively, by any intellectual biases. Whenever possible, reviewers should be objective and constructive in their reviews and provide specific feedback that will help the authors to improve their manuscript. Personal criticism of the author(s) is not appropriate.
• Peer reviewers should base their judgments on their own expert knowledge. In order to maintain the confidentiality of the scholarly review process, reviewers should not upload any unpublished manuscripts into any AI generative systems.