Reviewer Guidance

ASIAC aims to publish the best original works in all fields of politics and philosophy. The journal proposes to advance discussion in several areas of political philosophy with a view to engaging the interest of experts in the field through ways that explicitly acknowledge and respond to existing work in given areas.  With the exception of the contributions included in the section “The Interview”, the editorials, and some occasional essays, all articles – whether invited, in response to a call, or autonomously submitted – undergo a double-blind peer review process. 

Only those manuscripts meeting the highest standards of scholarly quality, originality, and argumentative clarity will be accepted for publication.

Reviewers are asked to fill in a form. Please note these general instructions: 

• We encourage reviewers to apply strict criteria regarding the quality and thematic scope of submissions, as well as their structure and language. 
• ASIAC has different sections (please visit the About the Journal page) and contributions must fit one of them. The Journal adopts the Chicago Style (A, Notes and Bibliography) for references. 
• Maximum length 45,000 characters (spaces and references included)
• Please note that ASIAC does not allow for more than two rounds of review, with very few exceptions. This means that we may ask you to review a revised version of the article, but it is unlikely we will ask you to review a second revision. 
• The categories we employ are:
• Accept submission: Use this category only in case no changes to content, structure, or language are required prior to publication. We expect that this will rarely be the case; this category is reserved for absolutely outstanding manuscripts.
• Revisions required: Use this category if only minor revisions are required to transform the manuscript into a high-quality, publishable article. While this category does not guarantee publication, it indicates that publication is likely if the revision addresses the reviewers’ specific comments.
• Resubmit for review: Use this category if major revisions are required to transform this manuscript into a high-quality, publishable article. 
• Decline submission: Use this category for manuscripts that you do not expect to turn into high-quality, publishable articles even contingent on major revisions. 
• See Comments: Use this category if further information is required.
• If you have already reviewed this article (or an earlier version) for another journal, please let us know.
• Please note that the editor-in-chief reserves the right to veto the publication of an article even if all reviewers have recommended publication.