Soumissions

Directives aux auteurs

Manuscripts should be submitted via the Journal’s submission wizard. The Journal editor and associate editors make decisions about submitted papers as rapidly as possible. All manuscripts are handled electronically throughout the consideration process. The authors are usually informed within a month if the paper is not being considered.

All Articles submitted in the Essay section of Studi lockiani go through at least one round of review, usually two, sometimes more. At each stage, the editor will discuss the manuscript with editorial colleagues in the light of referees’ reports, and send a letter to the author offering one of the following options:

• The paper is accepted for publication without any further changes required by the authors.
• The paper is accepted for publication once the authors have made some minor revisions in response to the referees’ comments. Under these circumstances, revised papers are not usually sent back to the referees, but are accepted for publication once the editors have checked that the referees’ suggestions have been implemented and the paper is in the required format.
• A final decision on publication is deferred, pending the authors’ response to the referees’ request for major revisions. Under these circumstances, revised papers are sent back to some or all of the referees for a second opinion.
• The paper is rejected because the referees have raised considerable objections. Under these circumstances, the editor’s letter will state explicitly whether or not a resubmitted version would be considered. If the editor has invited the authors to resubmit, authors must ensure that all the comments made by the referees have been satisfactorily addressed, unless specifically advised otherwise by the editor in the letter, and must accompany the resubmitted version with a point-by-point response to the referees’ comments. The editor will not send resubmitted papers to the reviewers if the authors have not made a serious attempt to address all the referees’ criticisms.
• The paper is rejected with no offer to reconsider a resubmitted version. Under these circumstances, authors are strongly advised not to resubmit a revised version, as it will be declined without further review.

Authors of accepted papers will be asked to apply the journal citation style.

Peer review process:

 The judgment of the referees is anonymous and unappealable. Articles cannot, for any reason, be submitted by third parties, but must be sent to the editorial office by the author(s). Each author, when submitting a contribution, agrees not to submit it to other journals before knowing the outcome of the review process. The rule also applies to articles not submitted to a double-blind peer-reviewed section (whose acceptance or rejection is decided solely by the editorial board).

The editors may request contributions from reputable experts regarding a specific topic: such contributions are called "invited articles," and this eventuality will be clearly intelligible at the time of publication.
Obvious typos as such and minor nonconformities to editorial standards will be corrected by the editorial staff.
Articles that do not comply with the citation system and bibliographic notes will be rejected.

The journal relies on a double-blind peer review process. Papers proposed by authors are received by the editors, who decide whether to reject the proposal ex officio (in the case of obvious misconduct, or if the proposal’s topic is incompatible with the journal's scientific objectives) or to initiate the review process. In the latter case, the editors are assisted by the members of the editorial board in managing the anonymous review process, which involves the following steps: identifying the two reviewers, mediating between the reviewers and the authors while protecting their identities, and making a final decision on the publication of the proposal. In the event of a strong disagreement between the two reviewers, the editors and the editorial board may reserve the right to request a new opinion and initiate a second round of review.

The Open Journal System platform, which the journal relies on for the editorial production process and the issue’s publication, guarantees the protection of the identities of those involved in the blind review process. Reviewers are required to justify their judgment by completing the review form on the journal's OJS platform.

Upon request, members of the editorial board may disclose the identity of reviewers and authors only at the end of the review process and for the sole purpose of establishing direct contact.

Authors and reviewers should contact the editorial board and editors in case of disputes or reports.