Peer Review Process

All submissions to Archival Notes must adhere to the journal's focus and scope, as well as author guidelines. The Editor-in-Chief retains the right to decline articles that do not align with the journal's focus and scope or meet the requirements outlined in the guidance for authors. Manuscripts must be original and free from plagiarism. The editorial team employs software to verify plagiarism levels.

All submissions which are not rejected for these reasons undergo an initial assessment by the Editorial Board (regular issues) or the Guest Editor(s) involved in a thematic issue. Research articles submitted to the “Article” and “Focus” sections are subject to double-blind peer review. This entails rigorous and anonymous evaluation by at least two or one independent referees, depending on whether the articles are submitted for the "Articles" or "Focus" section, respectively. The peer-review process is overseen by the Editorial Board, in collaboration with the Journal Manager. In instances where an Editorial Board Member or a Guest Editor has a conflict of interest, such as being a (co-)author of a submitted article, another editor is assigned to manage the peer review process.

In cases where the two anonymous reviewers express highly divergent opinions on a manuscript submitted to the "Articles" section, a third and independent review is requested to another anonymous scholar. If an anonymous referee provides a negative evaluation of a manuscript submitted to the 'Focus' section, a second and independent review is requested from another anonymous scholar.

The Editor-in-Chief in coordination with the Editorial Board (regular issues) or the Guest Editor(s) (thematic issues) makes the final decision on manuscript acceptance based on the reviewers' comments.

The review process typically takes between 4 to 12 weeks. Decision categories include:

  • Reject – Manuscripts that fail to meet the journal's standards for quality and originality will not be published and authors will not have the opportunity to resubmit a revised version of the same manuscript to the journal.
  • Revise and Resubmit – Manuscripts that require significant revisions may be reconsidered after substantial reworking and will be sent for a second round of review.
  • Accept with Revisions – Manuscripts that receive an accept-pending-revisions decision will be published in the journal under the condition that major or minor modifications are made. Revisions will be reviewed by the Editorial Board or the anonymous referees before publication.
  • Accept: Manuscripts that meet all criteria will be published without further modifications.

Authors are notified of the decision upon completion of the review process and are given 2 to 4 weeks to finalize and submit the revised manuscript. Failure to do so within the specified timeframe may result in rejection of the article.