Guidelines for Referees

The following set of guidelines have been compiled to help guide referees who have been asked to comment on an article submitted to Internet Archaeology, but potential authors might also find it useful to read through this advice.

As a referee, you are essential to our existence as a quality journal of record. Without your valuable time and effort, archaeological reports and articles would not be adequately evaluated. We appreciate your help and always welcome suggestions for improvement of our peer-review process. Refereeing is a lot of work and essential for us. Thank you for letting us impose on you!

Referee comments are required to be sent back to Internet Archaeology by email. Please also refer to our editorial policy but contact the Editor if you have any queries.

Authors have been assured of the privacy and security of their submitted work, so we ask that you do not refer to the work that the draft describes before it has been published. We hope that you will adopt a positive, impartial attitude towards the article you are assessing but if you feel you are unable to judge a submission impartially, please inform us stating why. Deadlines for referee reports are arranged individually with the editor.

Your Report

Please prepare a report for the author(s) of the article you have been asked to assess. Should you wish to use them, you may find the topics listed below a useful structure. Your comments should be straightforward, constructive and in sufficient detail for the author to follow your line of reasoning, and where applicable, suggestions for major revisions should be included. If revisions are requested, please be as explicit as possible, and distinguish revisions you consider necessary from those you consider desirable but optional.

IA places no restrictions concerning length, number of images/figures etc. but the overall length of an article should be commensurate with the content presented. The draft you receive may not be in the journal housestyle, but note that you are not requested to correct style, language or grammar. However, errors which a copy editor may not recognise e.g. misspellings of site names/species, incorrect or outmoded terminology, inappropriate jargon etc. should be pointed out. If you deem necessary, your report may be divided up into two sections: comments for transmission to the author and comments for the editor only. If you choose to do this, please mark your sections clearly. The journal is interested in publishing high quality content that is accurate, original and rigorous.

• Does the article adhere to Internet Archaeology's Editorial Policy

• Is the archaeological information new
• Is the archaeological information factually accurate
• Overall is the article appropriate in topic, quality and originality
• Does the article supply all relevant documentation

• Is the title appropriate
• Does the abstract provide the correct emphasis
• Is the article well structured and organised
• Is the objective clear and adequate in its approach and execution
• Is the research design/methodology/framework/theoretical position clearly described
• Does the article acknowledge pertinent theories and current debate in the field in question, and does the article contribute to such debate
• Is the discussion length and relevance appropriate
• Are the interpretations and conclusions sound and supported by the discussion

• Do the references reflect an appropriate level of familiarity with the subject area
• Is the overall level of clarity (e.g. terminology) acceptable. Some technical language and concepts are necessary but they can also be obscure, so please note if there are aspects to be clarified.
• Are the images/figures appropriate
• Are there any irrelevant sections

• Do you recommend this article for publication in Internet Archaeology:
  1. with minor revisions
  2. with major revisions
  3. would not recommend without substantial rewriting and restructuring

Please provide any further comments that may be of help to the author and/or editor.

Until you have been notified that we have received your comments, please retain a copy of your assessment. Please feel free to contact the Editor at any stage in the process if you have any queries.

 HOME   ABOUT   SUBSCRIBE   FOR AUTHORS   SEARCH