Manuscripts should be submitted to editoratdeserepidotorg.

Submissions should conform to the journal’s style guide.

Editorial process


As a young journal without close analogues in its field, Deserepi has an evolving profile and welcomes proposals for original, scholarly rigorous research papers that may not fit in elsewhere. Whenever unsure about a topic’s relevance to the journal, authors are encouraged to ‘pitch’ paper ideas to the editor.

Based on a preliminary abstract and further discussion, the editor may, possibly in consultation with the editorial board, advise on the suitability of an article on research work in progress.

Editorial appraisal

Upon reception of a draft, the editor decides whether to accept it for review, based on a preliminary assessment of its scholarly standards, its relevance to the journal’s subject and its adherence to the submission guidelines and style guide. The editor notifies the editorial board of each submission and invites comment to inform a manuscript’s appraisal.

Reasons for rejecting a paper at this stage may include: incompatibility with the journal’s subject; insufficiently original content; non-adherence to the journal’s style, in particular its citation style.

Deserepi aims to communicate the reasons for the editorial appraisal of each serious submission. However, since anyone can submit a draft, no commitment is made to explain the reasons for every rejection.

Double-blind peer review

All papers accepted for peer review will be sent to two external reviewers selected by the editor, in consultation with the editorial board.

External reviewers must have expertise in subjects close to that of the submitted manuscript. The following are not eligible as external reviewers: members of the Deserepi editorial board, including the editor; persons deemeed to be professionally or otherwise related to the author, e.g., by sharing an affiliation or grant. Authors may also request that specific individuals not be chosen as external reviewers. The editorial board takes into account such exclusion requests, without committing to humour them.

Reviews at this stage are double-blind: authors and reviewers are not informed of each other’s identity. Authors are requested to submit an ‘anonymised’ version of their manuscript that avoids overt or implicit references to the author. Deserepi commits to not undermining the anonymity of the review process. It cannot, on tbe other hand, prevent reviewers from separately communicating with authors, should they independently identify them. It is understood that some scholars object to blind reviews on principle and actively seek to reveal their identities to authors.

Reviews must be based on the style guide. Should the editor or editorial board find a review to be insufficiently exhaustive or otherwise non-compliant with those guidelines, they will request a new review from the same or another external reviewer. Should it prove impossible to obtain two external reviews for a manuscript complying with the journal’s review guidelines, the editorial process will not continue.

Deserepi requests reviewers to submit reviews within one month of receiving a draft. It cannot, however, guarantee reviews will be completed within any specific timeframe.

Additional peer review

In addition to requesting blind reviews, the editor may invite other scholars to review a manuscript. These may include members of the editorial board, reviewers recommended by the author and other subject-matter experts. These additional reviews are not subject to anonymity or other requirements.

Editorial decision

On the basis of the reviewers’ recommendations, the editor decides whether to accept a paper, in consultation with the editorial board.

Two double-blind recommendations to reject automatically result in rejection. One recommendation to reject may only exceptionally be overriden by a new double-blind review if the author argues to the satisfaction of the editorial board that the review was biased or otherwise unscholarly. Under recommendations to revise and resubmit, no papers will be accepted until all issues raised by the reviewers have been properly addressed. Papers that have undergone major revisions may still require an additional review. Unanimous recommendations to accept should, in principle, be followed, unless the editor can identify serious flaws in a paper overlooked by all reviewers.

Editorial review

The editor may request additional revisions, including major revisions, to accepted papers. Acceptance of a paper is conditional on the authors’ appropriately addressing all revision requests.


Accepted papers are published as a preprint within two weeks of reception of a final draft. Authors may still revise papers published as preprints until their publication in a journal issue.

Papers published as preprints between January and November will be collected in a yearly issue. Published issues may not be retroactively altered, other than by the addition of notes that a later issue carries a correction or retraction note pertaining to one of the issue’s papers.

Deserepi will take measures to ensure that any published issues, in their original form, remain archived in public online or print repositories, so that the editor or editorial board cannot further alter or remove them should any external circumstances affect the integrity of the journal’s website.