Review process
History in Africa (HIA) adopts the double-anonymized review process for articles, which means that the identities of the peer reviewer(s) and the author(s) are hidden from each other. All manuscripts are submitted through ScholarOne, where the managing editor receives them and checks for completion and adherence to the journal guidelines.
Papers that pass the preliminary check by the managing editor are forwarded to the Editors-in-Chief (EIC). The EIC will read each submission to determine suitability for the journal. Manuscripts determined unsuitable will receive a desk rejection at this point.
Manuscripts determined to have the potential to contribute to HIA’s specialization in methodological and historiographical matters pertaining to Africa and its diasporic histories are next sent to the Associate Editors (AE). At this point AE may weigh in on the suitability of the manuscripts and either a) deem it suitable and begin the process of seeking peer reviewers or, b) recommend a desk rejection.
For articles sent out to peer review, at least two peer reviews are required to reach a decision on each article. Possible Decisions include Reject, Major Revision, Minor Revision, and Accept.
Articles given a Major or Minor review decision are sent back to the author for revision. Revised articles are received by the AE who will make a recommendation and send it back to an EIC for final decision. The AE also has the option to send the revision back to the original reviewers to see if their recommendations were sufficiently addressed, or send to a third reviewer or an Editorial Review Board member for a final review. After review at any of these levels an article can be rejected or approved or sent back to the author for another revision.
Accepted articles move through the production process with additional edits at the copyediting and proof stages before they are published in the journal.