A Journal of Rhetoric, Writing, and Culture

Review Process

enculturation is an anonymously peer-reviewed journal. Within a few weeks of receiving your submission, a section editor will confirm receipt and will notify you of our interest in your submission. 

If a submission does not fit within the scope of enculturation or is otherwise unsuitable for anonymous peer review, a section editor will provide feedback explaining this decision. If a submission is accepted for review, it is assigned two anonymous peer reviewers (two editorial board members or one editorial board member and one guest reviewer who specializes in a given field). These scholars review submissions based on the following format. 

General Evaluation (select appropriate numbers):

___1. The submission is theoretically and stylistically sound, makes a significant contribution to rhetorical studies, and should be published with only minor revisions.

___2. The submission has potential to make a strong contribution to rhetorical studies but requires considerable revisions to make it a solid publishable piece.

___3. The submission raises significant concerns about theories, methods, arguments, and/or analyses and does not warrant further consideration toward publication.

Once reviews are submitted (typically within 8 weeks), a section editor will synthesize the reviews, forward reviewer comments to the author, and communicate the current status of the submission:

1) Accepted: The submission is accepted for publication, most often with minor revisions. This response coincides with evaluation #1 above.

2) Revise and Resubmit: The submission exhibits significant promise but requires rewriting to make it a solid publishable contribution. This response coincides with evaluation #2 above. 

3) Does not warrant further consideration: The submission has substantive issues that prevent the journal from moving forward with further review at this time. This response coincides with evaluation #3 above.

Because enculturation operates on rolling submissions, no deadlines for revisions are assigned. Authors who are asked to revise and resubmit, however, must include a brief cover letter explaining how they have addressed reviewer concerns.

Once a submission is resubmitted, a Section Editor will determine if it is ready for a 2nd review. If not, more revisions may be requested. If deemed ready for a 2nd review, the submission will be sent, if possible, to the same two anonymous peer reviewers who read the initial submission. If submissions are ultimately accepted, authors will work with the Managing Editor on any needed minor revisions and return their work to the Section Editor for final review.

Once the Section Editor is convinced the manuscript is ready to move toward publication, the manuscript is submitted to the Copy Editors who will correspond with the author to polish the manuscript. At this point, no major content revisions are possible. The author and Copy Editors will focus their revisions on style, even as some organizational issues may arise for clarity and cohesion purposes. 

Once the Copy Editors approve a manuscript, the submission is sent to the Production Editors for formatting. After the manuscript has been formatted, the author will be asked to review the piece. Authors will be given a short turn around period to check for accuracy or other issues and resubmit to the Production Editors. When the submission is ready to be published, it will appear in the "Latest Content" menu on the right side of enculturation’s homepage, be promoted on social media, and eventually be folded into the next issue.