¶ 1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 0 In SQ’s open review process, are the names of the papers’ authors kept anonymous or do reviewers know who the authors are? SQ has adopted double blind review for its traditional process; in the past, reviewers were anonymous while authors were not. The open review process is open in all directions. Readers must register with MediaCommons, identifying themselves and their expertise, before posting.
¶ 3 Leave a comment on paragraph 3 0 Will the text and comments be visible to the public during the review process and afterward in an archived form? They will be visible during the open review period, 3/1/2010-5/5/2010 and afterward in an archived form, subject to the desires of the authors.
¶ 4 Leave a comment on paragraph 4 0 How will you be credentialing the reviewers? In both paths of review for this issue, the same pool of experts in Shakespeare and media history will be participating, regardless of the review path authors choose. Of course, an open process may also include a wider pool of readers, with correspondingly wider expertise. Because it may be important for untenured scholars whose work is being reviewed here to show that senior scholars of note participated in this process, we ask readers to register by their own names and describe their expertise in the short bios before they comment.
¶ 5 Leave a comment on paragraph 5 0 Will reviewers get instructions in the open model as they do in the traditional model? Yes, see the welcome page for instructions on commenting on the different kinds of essays posted here. And see the answer to the FAQ above on credentialing.
¶ 6 Leave a comment on paragraph 6 0 Are there any successful precedents for this experiment in open peer-review? Or is SQ the first high-profile humanities journal to try this model? We don’t know of a humanities journal that has experimented with open review before the publication decision, though we will update this page if we learn of one. Science depositories have used a variety of open forms of review successfully (e.g., arXiv.org). Some humanities monographs (e.g., Fitzpatrick, Wardrup-Fruin) have used it in combination with traditional review. See Chapter 1 of Planned Obsolescence, on this site, for a history of peer review including many of these experiments. It should be added that many humanists, including Shakespeareans, have used open comment forums of various kinds for work accepted for publication, for decades.
¶ 7 Leave a comment on paragraph 7 0 How exactly will the open review unfold? The editorial team undertakes an initial review as usual, with the addition of the guest editor. After editorial evaluation, authors whose works advance to the phase of expert vetting will be invited to opt into the open review process. For those who do, their essays will be posted online for public commentary and feedback between 3/1/2010 and 5/5/2010. Authors may respond to this feedback before submitting their revised essays for final selection by the editors. Authors who decline the open review and opt for a traditional review will not be penalized in the selection process.
¶ 8 Leave a comment on paragraph 8 0 May authors respond to comments made by readers? The point of the process is that the author should be able to respond intelligently to critical comments made in open review: during the process, by responding as he/she chooses, and after the review period, by revising the essay appropriately.
¶ 9 Leave a comment on paragraph 9 0 Will an author’s responses to comments during the open review period be evaluated as part of the final review phase for the essay? No. The final version of the essay will be evaluated on its own terms, as it always is.
¶ 10 Leave a comment on paragraph 10 0 May authors post responses to the essays of other authors? The short answer is yes, for the same reasons given in answer to the previous question about author responses. It is important to observe that there is no direct conflict of interest in this experiment. Potential contributors are not competing for space in the journal since the journal can ultimately publish as many essays as the Editor deems publishable.