Scientia et Humanitas

Aims & Scope

About the Journal Focus and Scope We accept academic articles from the humanities , the sciences , and the social sciences . They must be written by a MTSU undergraduate student, a MTSU graduate student, or a recent alumnus. Since we actively encourage submissions, if you have any doubts about a potential submission, please contact us for more information! Section Policies Articles Open Submissions Indexed Peer Reviewed Peer Review Process ALL ARTICLES undergo a double-blind peer review process from two separate reviewers, which usually entails subsequent revision before final acceptance. In double-blind peer review, authors and reviewers remain anonymous, which ensures objectivity. PEER REVIEWERS primarily examine a paper's argument, evidence, logical and stylistic consistency, and the ability of a paper to answer and meet potential counter objections. Peer reviewers will look for ways for revision to "deepen" or extend a paper's argument. A peer reviewer's commentary will generally consist of "global"-level changes, unless the reviewer decides to give general commentary about the academic style of the piece. "Local"-level commentary will occur in the proofing stage. Generally, most submissions go through multiple revisions -- but we'll work to eventually publish all authors willing to undertake those revisions. FACULTY REVIEWS , checking for discipline-specific quality assurance, handle the article after the peer reviewers have given their approval. Once the article passes this stage, it then heads to proofreading and copyediting. Initial response time: is usually less a month. This includes receiving feedback from both peer reviewers, after which the author works with the editor-in-chief or associate editor. Entire process time: about 2-5 months. The time usually depends on the number of revisions as well as how quickly peer reviewers and copy editors complete their tasks. Submissions which meet the Fall deadline stand a significantly higher chance of inclusion i

A twelfth criterion — whether APC fees are clearly disclosed — is not scored here; it is left out of the total rather than counted as a failure. Publication charges appear in the metrics card above.

Based on the Think.Check.Submit framework by DOAJ, COPE & OASPA. All data from verified open sources.