Peer Review

All submissions are initially assessed by the associate editor, who decides whether or not the article fits the scope of the journal and is suitable for peer review. Submissions considered suitable are then reviewed by two independent experts, who assess the article for clarity, validity, and sound methodology.

The journal operates a double-blind peer review process, meaning that both authors and reviewers remain anonymous for the review process. Reviewers are asked to provide formative feedback, even if an article is not deemed suitable for publication in the journal.

Reviewers are expected to provide constructive feedback in a collegial way. They should clearly and objectively identify areas in the submission that require improvement (e.g., flow of argument, quality of writing, gaps in citation, etc.) and, where possible, offer suggestions for how to improve the manuscript (e.g., suggesting additional sources that the author should cite).

Personal criticism of the author is not acceptable. Authors have different linguistic and cultural backgrounds and epistemological frameworks, and authors may be at different stages of their careers, so reviewers should recognize that they may need to read sensitively. KULA reserves the right to redact comments or not pass on comments to authors if the editors consider them to be uncivil and/or inappropriate. 

Reviewers are expected to keep the review process confidential. They should not disclose any details about the work under review to anyone except the associate editor and the editor in chief.

Reviewers are expected to follow the ethical guidelines for peer reviewers provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics. 

Based on the reviewer reports, the associate editor will make a recommendation to decline the submission, to request revisions, to request revisions and resubmission for another round of peer review, or to accept the submission. Overall editorial responsibility rests with the journal’s editor-in-chief, who is supported by an international editorial board and who makes final decisions about whether to accept submissions for publication.

Note: Not all article types (e.g., project reports) undergo peer review. The information in this section applies to research articles, methods articles, commentaries, and teaching reflections.