Our Review Process and Scoring Criteria
Our 3-Round Review Process:
Round 1:Upon submission, papers will undergo a double-blind review process conducted by two editors, each of whom, after making their comments on the paper, will fill out a scoring rubric (see "Scoring Criteria") with their recommended decision. Once our editors are done, a senior editor will review both the paper and the two scoring rubrics and decide whether it should be rejected or accepted for further review. This step should take approximately 2 months from the date of the paper's submission. Authors will be notified of their decision status via email, which will contain both scoring rubrics and, if accepted for further review, their paper with comments.
Authors with papers accepted for further review will also be asked to write an abstract (150–250 words) and a list of 5–8 keywords for their paper, if these have not already been included in the first draft (though this is not required for submission).
Round 2:Authors will be given 3 weeks to incorporate our editors' comments. Failure to return the paper by the deadline will result in a rejection, unless a requested extension has been given (1-week maximum).
Once returned, papers will be reviewed by one of our editors-in-chief, who will decide whether to accept or reject the paper for publication. This should take approximately 2–3 weeks from the date of the paper's return. Authors will also be asked to write a brief 2–3 sentence bio for inclusion in both the online and printed version of the issue, as well as provide their Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCID) if they have one.
Authors will receive comments on their papers regardless of acceptance.
Round 3:Authors will be given 3 weeks to incorporate these comments. Failure to return the paper by the deadline will result in a rejection, unless a requested extension has been given (1-week maximum).
Once returned, papers will be copyedited and formatted by one of our editors-in-chief. This should take approximately 2–3 weeks from the date of the paper's return. After the paper has been copyedited, the author will receive their paper to review these edits and/or to suggest any final changes. Authors will be given 2 weeks to respond. After this, the paper will then be formatted and proofread. Once the finalized paper has received the author’s approval, it will then be uploaded to our website for public viewing.Once a threshold of 6 accepted papers for a particular division (Religious Studies, Theology, or Philosophy of Religion) has been reached, papers will then be compiled, formatted, and printed as a physical journal, which will also be available to be viewed for free online. Authors will receive 2 free physical copies sent via mail.
Limiting Our Submissions:
Due to our limited number of editors, Effervescence will be limiting the number of received submissions each cycle. This means papers will be received on a first-come, first-served basis, calculated based on the set workload required of each editor. Once our submission forms open up, they will remain open until a certain (undisclosed) threshold has been reached, and then will close shortly thereafter.
It must be noted that should a received paper be desk rejected, the Google Form to which that rejected paper had been submitted may reopen, though this decision will depend on other considerations.
Scoring Criteria:
Papers will be assessed based on five criteria, each rated on a scale from 1–5: originality, content, scholarship, organization, and voice.
Originality: How insightful or creative is the argument? What new ideas are brought to the conversation?
Content: How clear and focused is the argument? Is the analysis thorough and coherent? Are all ideas and terminology developed and clearly defined?
Scholarship: Are sources used effectively? Does the author incorporate a variety of primary and/or secondary sources? Are all claims cited? Is important background information provided?
Organization: Are transitions smooth? Do all paragraphs demonstrate unity and purpose? Do details fit? Do arguments proceed logically? Is the paper generally easy to follow?
Voice: How sophisticated is the author's use of language? Is word choice specific and contextually appropriate? Are there any grammatical/spelling errors?
Who May Submit?
Effervescence is committed to spotlighting a diverse range of intellectual views in our journal while upholding the principles of equity, inclusivity, and non-discrimination in all aspects of our editorial processes. Each submission will be considered solely on the merits of scholarship without regard to the race, ethnicity, national origin, religious/non-religious affiliation, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, age, disability, or socioeconomic status of the author.