This overview describes IR’s review process for all submissions. (The general guidelines explain details of how IR handles blind and non-blind reviews.)
All submissions are initially reviewed by the editor-in-chief and/or any delegated members of the IR editorial committee. This first review examines for (a) suitability of the topic for inclusion in IR, (b) overall quality and/or potential for improvement, and (c) how the submission meets IR’s integral criteria in presenting the content. The results of this first round of review are sent to authors, and may include guidance for revisions required for a submission to pass on to the second stage of review. Submissions such as art, poetry, book reviews, interviews, responses to articles and other short works are accepted for publication through this process alone.
Once accepted for the second stage of our review process, editorial staff determine appropriate peer reviewers. Peer reviewers conduct a content and quality review of the submission. Review comments are compiled and sent to author(s) for further revisions (if necessary) prior to publication, or an explanation of why the article is not being accepted at this time.
(If a member of IR’s editorial committee is a qualified reviewer, and the submission is for blind review, the committee’s work processes preserve the anonymity of the author until the issue enters its final production phase. Submissions from IR editors are subjected to the same review criteria and process as other submissions.)
IR does not use a fixed panel of peer reviewers. Because of its transdisciplinary nature, it receives submissions that span a wide range of fields. Staff research and invite qualified reviewers in fields of endeavor related to each submission.