Start Submission Become a Reviewer

Editorial Policies

Peer Review Process

RoundTable is a peer-reviewed postgraduate journal. RoundTable applies a double-blind peer review. Referees remain anonymous for the author during the review procedure and the author’s name is removed from the manuscript under review.

Each article is first assessed by one of the editors from the editorial board and, if judged suitable for publication in RoundTable, is sent to two external reviewers for a double-blind peer review. This process will take an average of 6 weeks. Peer reviewers will be postgraduate researchers or early career academics working within relevant fields. Based on their recommendations, editors then decide whether the paper should be accepted as is, revised or rejected. In case of revisions, a final decision on publication will be made after resubmission. If there is no agreement on the part of the editors, the issue editor will make the final decision.

 

Section Policies

Academic Article

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed

Creative Work

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed

Review

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed

Interview

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed


Editorial Process

There will be an initial call for papers for each issue of RoundTable. The Issue Editors for each issue will review the call for papers and will contact individuals whose abstracts have been selected. A deadline will be set for the submission of the full paper. When the full paper is received it will be reviewed by one of the Issue Editors. If judged suitable it will be sent for double-blind peer review. The Editors will seek appropriate peer-reviewers for each article. The Issue Editors will contact each contributor with the results of the peer review and will inform them if the article has been rejected, accepted as is, or accepted with revisions. A further date for submission of revised papers will be set at this time. Once revised papers are resubmitted they will be reviewed by the Issue Editors and the contributor will be informed about the final decision to publish. 

After approval of the final version, the article will be published in the journal. 

The editorial board are particularly interested in the following elements: 

  • Strength of argumentation.
  • Structure of the paper.
  • Citations.

Peer-reviewers will specifically be asked for their feedback on the relationship and relevance of the article to other work in the field.

RoundTable adheres to the best practice guidelines as established by the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) and available at: https://doaj.org/bestpractice


Editorial Team / Governing Body

RoundTable is managed by an editorial board consisting of PhD students working within the fields of English Literature and Creative Writing. The journal publisher is Fincham Press, an imprint of the Department of English and Creative Writing at the University of Roehampton. As part of our Quality Assurance plan RoundTable content, policies and operating procedures are reviewed annually by a panel of individuals with experience or expertise in the field who are unaffiliated with the journal. 

There are two Issue Editors who co-ordinate with the editorial board. The full names and affiliations of the journal's editors for each issue are available on the Editorial Team page.


Process for identification of and dealing with allegations of research misconduct

The Editorial team will take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, including plagiarism, citation manipulation, and data falsification/fabrication, among others. In no case shall a journal or its editors encourage such misconduct, or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place. In the event that a journal's publisher or editors are made aware of any allegation of research misconduct relating to a published article in their journal - the publisher or editor shall follow COPE's guidelines (or equivalent) in dealing with allegations.


Conflicts of interest

Any potential conflict of interest on the part of members of the Editorial Board, or Issue Editors for individual issues will be clearly identified, and if necessary individuals who have stated that a potential conflict of interests exists will refrain from involvement with peer review or other assessment of submissions where conflicts have been identified.

Quick links