Every article published by ECF was accepted for publication by no less than two qualified reviewers as a result of a process of anonymous reviewing (double-blind peer review).
The reviewers are independent of the authors and not affiliated with the same institution.
The Journal’s/Series’ Scientific Director guarantees the proper execution of the peer review process for every article published in the Journal/Series. The evaluation is conducted in accordance with the following criteria:
Revision policies for the different sections:
Abstract Submission – September 15, 2021
Abstract acceptance – October 15, 2021
Articles Submission – Febrauary 15, 2022 (issue 1) or July 15, 2022 (issue 2)
Prospective publication – une 2022 (issue 1) and December 2022 (issue 2)
Call for Papers | 2020 Topic: [re]constructions
magazén is accepting proposals to its 2022 volume entitled [re]constructions, which shall devote two semestral issues of the journal (June and December) to the theory and practice of [re]configuring lost realities, [re]creating long gone dimensions, [re]building likely scenarios, [re]considering exhibition settings and [re]covering disappeared traces of historical and cultural value. Indeed, over the last decade the principle of [re]construction by means of scholarly expertise set the pace of many recent research projects in the prosperous field of digital and public humanities. Particularly digital tools and interdisciplinary collaborations provided the opportunity to [re]compose varied sources and [re]visualise research data, such as to offer unprecedented insights in historical, societal, cultural, artistic, archaeological, and political events. Evolving research technologies and consolidated methodological approaches in the digital and public humanities allowed scholars to test their analytical abilities against a set of novel possibilities to make their results public, immersive, and virtually appreciated. In this regard, digital and public humanities lay at the crossroads of the kind of speculation, intuition, and invention that comes with every act of scholarly [re]construction, seen as a creative task steered by scientific rigour.
A true symbol of this attitude are the square brackets, which stand as a visual sign and signifier of the ‘gap-filling’ and ‘meaning-making’ tasks humanists always aim to accomplish in their research work. In a sense, digital and public humanists have the privilege of [re]framing their disciplines in various ways, such as: filling the gap of missing text fragments and traditions, retracing the dynamics of historical processes and events, retrieving dispersed artworks and collections, reconstructing lost archaeological sites and artefacts. Eventually, magazén’s volume 2022 will draw particular attention to the public aspects of such endeavours, given that successful [re]constructions hold firm to the principle of research dissemination and audience involvement from their very inception, rather than having public access just as a late side-effect of scholarly work.
Hence, for its 2022 volume magazén is set to examine in two semestral issues the concept of ‘[re]constructions’ as a procedural and constitutional peculiarity of digital and public humanities. Scholars are particularly invited to submit contributions that span from theoretical debates to methodological reflections, also comprising the examination of particular case studies from the heterogeneous domains of Digital Textual Scholarship, Digital and Public History, Digital and Public Archaeology, Digital and Public Art History, GLAM studies.
For scholars interested in submitting a proposal, please write an abstract of no more than 200 words together with a short biographical note and the provisional title of the paper. All materials should be sent by September 15, 2021 via email (subject: “magazén 2022 – Call for Papers”) to the editorial board at the following address: email@example.com. Notice of selection will be given to authors within four weeks from submission deadline.
Finalised contributions are expected to be 6,000-9,000 words long (notes and bibliography included) and will undergo double blind peer review. Accepted languages are Italian and English, though all texts must have an English abstract and stick to the ‘Editorial Guidelines’ of Edizioni Ca’ Foscari. Texts that should not comply with editorial guidelines will not be accepted. Please note that the author must secure all copyright permissions (reproduction costs included) for images and other media.
The deadline for all accepted articles is February 15, 2022, for issue 1 and July 15, 2022, for issue 2. Final publication of the first issue is planned by June 2022, while the second issue will be due in December 2022.
For further details please contact the editorial board (firstname.lastname@example.org).
Ethical Code of magazén
magazén is a peer-reviewed scientific journal whose policy is inspired by the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) Ethical Code. See the Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
The Publisher must provide the Journal with adequate resources and the guidance of experts, in order to carry out its role in the most professional way, aiming at the highest quality standard.
The Publisher must have a written agreement that defines the relationship with the owner of the Journal and/or the Editor-in-Chief. The agreement must comply with the Code of Behavior for Publishers of Scientific Journals, as established by COPE.
The relationship among the Editor-in-Chief, the Editorial Board and the Publisher is based on the principle of publishing independence.
The Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board of magazén alone are responsible for the decision to publish the articles submitted.
Submitted articles, after having been checked for plagiarism by means of the anti-plagiarism software Compilatio that is used by the University and is made available to us, will be sent to at least two reviewers. Final acceptance presumes the implementation of possible amendments, as required by the reviewers and under the supervision of the magazén Editors.
The magazén Editors and Editorial Board must evaluate each submitted paper in compliance with the Journalʼs policy, i.e. exclusively on the basis of its scientific content, without discrimination of race, sex, gender, creed, ethnic origin, citizenship, or the scientific, academic and political position of the Authors.
If the magazén Editors and Editorial Board notice (or receive notifications of) mistakes or inaccuracies, conflict of interest or plagiarism in a published article, they will immediately warn the Author and the Publisher and will undertake the necessary actions to resolve the issue. If necessary, they will withdraw the article or publish a recantation.
Authors must follow the Guidelines for Authors to be downloaded from the magazén website.
No multiple submissions
Authors must explicitly state that their work is original in all its parts and that the submitted paper has not been previously published, nor submitted to other journals, until the entire evaluation process is completed. Since no paper gets published without significant revision, earlier dissemination in conference proceedings or working papers does not preclude consideration for publication, but Authors are expected to fully disclose publication/dissemination of the material in other closely related publications, so that the overlap can be evaluated by the magazén Editors.
Authorship must be correctly attributed; all those who have given a substantial contribution to the design, organisation and accomplishment of the research the article is based on, must be indicated as Co-Authors. The respective roles of each co-author should be described in a footnote. The statement that all authors have approved the final version should be included in the disclosure.
Conflicts of interest and financing
Authors, under their own responsibility, must avoid any conflict of interest affecting the results obtained or the interpretations suggested. The magazén Editors will give serious and careful consideration to suggestions of cases in which, due to possible conflict of interest, an Author’s work should not be reviewed by a specific scholar. Authors should indicate any financing agency or the project the article stems from.
Authors must see to it that all works consulted be properly quoted. If works or words of others are used, they have to be properly paraphrased or duly quoted. Citations between “double quotes” (or «angled quotation marks» if the text is written in a language other than English) must reproduce the exact wording of the source; under their own responsibility, Authors should carefully refrain from disguising a restyling of the source’s wording, as though it was the original formulation.
Whenever required, the research protocols must be authorised in advance by the Ethical Committee of Ca’ Foscari University of Venice.
When Authors find a mistake or an inaccuracy in their own article, they must immediately warn the magazén Editors, providing all the information needed to make the due adjustments.
By means of the peer-review procedure, reviewers assist the magazén Editors and Editorial Board in taking decisions on the articles submitted. They are expected to offer the Authors suggestions as to possible adjustments aimed at improving their contribution submission.
Timing and conflicts of interest
If a reviewer does not feel up to the task of doing a given review, or if she/he is unable to read the work within the agreed schedule, she/he should notify the magazén Editors. Reviewers must not accept articles for which there is a conflict of interest due to previous contributions or to a competition with a disclosed author (or with an author they believe to have identified).
The content of the reviewed work must be considered confidential and must not be used without explicit authorisation by the author, who is to be contacted via the editor-in-chief. Any confidential information obtained during the peer review process should not be used for other purposes.
Reviewers should see themselves not as adversaries but as advocates for the field. Any comment must be done in a collaborative way and from an objective point of view. Reviewers should clearly motivate their comments and keep in mind the Golden Rule of Reviewing: “Review for others as you would have others review for you”.
Reviewers should report any similarity or overlapping of the work under analysis with other works known to them.