1. Call for contributions: We first invite proposals. Join us in drop-in Zoom sessions to work up ideas or meet potential collaborators.

2. Proposal assessment: The editorial team will assess whether the subject is relevant to Culture Caleidoscoop and the issue themes and respond to everyone. If not, the editorial team will reject the contribution outright or offer suggestions. Titles of accepted proposals will be sent to all other contributors.

3. Contribution development: Contributors will have time to work on full contributions. The Editorial Team will be available for support.

4. Peer review: The Editorial Team will facilitate a personalised, productive feedback process. 

• Contributions will be peer reviewed by at least two reviewers in a relevant field. One will likely sit on our Editorial or Advisory Collective. Contributors may be asked for suggestions for peer reviewers.
• Peer reviewers will offer constructive feedback on contributions. This process will be carefully facilitated by the editorial team to ensure a positive, fair, and constructive process. Additional feedback can be provided via Track Changes in a Word document, via an online video call, email, or another channel, depending on the contributor’s and peer reviewers’ preferences and the most suitable method for the type of contribution.
• Feedback will address the contribution’s relevance to Culture Caleidoscoop; potential areas for improvement, including suggestions for development or further reading or research, and how to further build on what works well in the contribution. 
• Peer reviewers will also make suggestions (if needed) for how to better align the contribution with Culture Caleidoscoop’s values as well as provide feedback on how to make contributions clearer and more accessible or relevant for readers.
• Peer reviewers will be guided to offer feedback around specific criteria dependent on the type of contribution. See the Contributor Guidelines for more information on expectations around different content.
• Peer reviewers and contributors will also be invited to record or summarise some of this process so this discussion and learning can be shared alongside the final contribution.

5. Revisions: Contributors will be expected to use the feedback to strengthen their contribution. Contributors may contact the editorial team for support.

6. Copyediting and translation: Once the contributions have been adjusted based on feedback, contributions will be copyedited for clarity and consistency, and contributors will have another chance to approve any changes. If relevant, pieces will be translated.

7. Final checks: For example, we will check all the right permissions are secured and check figure captions and alt text.

8. Typesetting: Contributions will be finalised and formatted in preparation for publication.

9. Publication: Your contribution will be published on our platform and via openjournals.nl.

Opportunity for non-open peer review process

While we encourage a more personal and open peer-review process, we understand that a double-blind process may be preferable in some cases. For a double-blind peer review process, the contribution will be given to peer reviewers without any identifying information (e.g. the contributor’s name and any other identifying information in the contribution will be removed), and the contributor won’t know who their peer reviewers are.

When you submit your contribution, please explain if you have any preferences regarding peer-review (e.g., if you think a double-blind peer review is necessary or if you prefer a video call to discuss feedback). We will do our best to accommodate your wishes.

‍Unless requested when you submit a proposal or contribution, we will not treat your contribution as a piece to be blind reviewed.

Confidentiality

All details about a submitted contribution (accepted or not) will remain confidential. Feedback and correspondence relating to the peer-review process will not be shared with anyone outside of the editorial team, contributor(s), and peer reviewers.

Ongoing learning

We will continue to develop our peer-review process to benefit our contributors and readers as much as possible and to learn as we go through this process.