For Reviewers

ABOUT CROSS-CURRENTS: EAST ASIAN HISTORY AND CULTURE REVIEW

Cross-Currents is a collaborative project launched by the Research Institute of Korean Studies at Korea University (RIKS) and the Institute of East Asian Studies at the University of California–Berkeley (IEAS). The journal is published quarterly online and semi-annually in print. The print journal features articles from the peer-reviewed issues of our e-journal (which is the journal of record for indexing and citation purposes). The print journal may also seek to further cluster e-journal content that treats related themes.

Cross-Currents gives the highest priority to papers that have significant implications for current models of understanding East Asian history and culture. We are also particularly interested in scholarship that extends East Asian studies beyond those issues traditionally addressed by Western humanities and social science journals and engages with issues of immediate concern to contemporary scholars in China, Japan, Korea and Vietnam.

CRITERIA FOR PUBLICATION

Within the scope of the journal as stated in the Mission Statement, manuscripts should represent work that sheds new light on, or has significant implications for, current models of understanding aspects of East Asian history and culture. Submissions will be reviewed in terms of their:

  1. Originality
  2. Usefulness and audience
  3. Quality of scholarship
  4. Engagement with existing literature
  5. Quality of writing and accuracy

THE REVIEW PROCESS

1. Authors submit:

  • a full English-language manuscript with any essential supporting files and multimedia files, or
  • a full manuscript in Chinese, Japanese, Korean, or Vietnamese, with a substantial summary of the article in English, and 
  • any essential supporting files and multimedia files.

2. The manuscript is first reviewed by an academic editor with expertise in the relevant area (usually one of our editorial or advisory board members). This individual will decide if the work offers a significant contribution to the field.

3.  Manuscripts that have been approved are then sent out to 2-3 specialists for peer review.

4. When all reviews have been received and considered by the editors, a decision letter to the author will be sent. The paper may be: accepted as is, accepted with minor revisions, eligible for re-submission with major revisions, or rejected.

REVIEWER SELECTION

We decide on reviewers for a particular manuscript based on many factors, including expertise, reputation, and specific recommendations of authors and our editorial board. As part of our editorial procedure, we regularly confer with potential reviewers before sending them manuscripts to review.

WRITING THE REVIEW

The purpose of the review is to provide the Cross-Currents editors with an expert opinion regarding the quality of the manuscript under consideration. Please use the Cross-Currents Manuscript Reading Report, which takes into consideration each of the five criteria for publication listed above.  After typing your report, please email it as an attachment to the Managing Editor at crosscurrents@berkeley.edu.

In the case of manuscripts chosen for publication with minor revisions or re-submission with major revisions, please supply the author with explicit feedback on how to improve their papers so they will be acceptable for publication in Cross-Currents.

CONFIDENTIALITY & ANONYMITY

The Cross-Currents review process is strictly anonymous and confidential and should be treated as such by reviewers. Because the author may have chosen to exclude some people from this process, no one not directly involved with the manuscript, including colleagues or other experts in the field, should be consulted by the reviewer, unless such consultations have first been discussed with the Managing Editor.

TIMELY REVIEW

Cross-Currents believes that an efficient editorial process that results in timely publication is valuable to the authors and our readership. One of the main motivations for publishing online is the possibility of speeding up the notoriously slow process of disseminating current research. We therefore request that reviewers respond promptly, honoring any deadlines set by the Managing Editor. A typical turn-around time for reviews is 30 days. If reviewers need more time, we request that they contact us promptly so that we can keep authors informed and, if necessary, assign alternate reviewers.

EDITING REVIEWERS’ REPORTS

The Cross-Currents editors do not edit any comments made by reviewers unless the language is deemed inappropriate for professional communication or the comments contain information considered to be confidential. In their comments to authors, reviewers are encouraged to be honest and respectful.

FEEDBACK TO REVIEWERS

Upon request, we will send our reviewers’ anonymous comments on a manuscript, along with the decision letter, to all reviewers of that manuscript. Reviewers who may have offered an opinion not in accordance with the final decision should not feel that their recommendation was not duly considered or their service not properly appreciated. Experts often disagree, and it is the job of the editorial team to make a final publication decision.