Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Critical Disability Discourses (CDD) is an interdisciplinary journal focused on experiences of disability from critical perspectives. CDD's goals are to provide an opportunity to emerging researchers and artists to contribute to the expanding field of critical disability studies and to gain exposure for their work in the public sphere. The journal considers articles and artwork from emerging scholars and artists, but undergraduate students, activists, and community members are also invited to contribute.

CDD follows an anonymous peer-review process in order to insure a fair assessment of all article based submissions. Please forgive the software glitch which inicates otherwise immediately below.

Please note that CDD has transitioned towards e-mail based reviews. Peer-reviewers will receive anonymized manuscripts as e-mail attachements and are no longer required to create an account through the website.

NB: Section Policies updated on June 2019

 

Section Policies

Editorials

Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

General

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Media

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Reviews

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

Initial Review

Editors determine whether basic criteria for submissions are met: o Anonymous

o Authors are emerging scholars

o 3,000-7,000 words

o Meets format guidelines

o Pertains to disability

o Is properly critical

o Is an argument - that is, is not merely descriptive

• Managerial editors reply to authors either to confirm receipt or to inform authors that basic criteria have not been met

Secondary Review

• Editors review abstracts and take responsibility for submissions pertaining to their area of expertise

• Editors decide which reviewers are best suited for each submission

• Peer reviewers  are sent their assigned abstracts and given one week to consent or reject to reviewing an article

• Peer reviewers are sent anonymous submissions and review forms Editorial Review: 3 weeks

• Editors read submissions and review forms

• Editors decide whether submissions have passed secondary review

• Editors decide which comments to provide authors when articles are returned with feedback

• Editors decide which submissions should be published

o Submissions will be evaluated alongside one another

o The variety of topics will be evaluated

• Managerial Editor emails authors in order to reject or accept papers. In all cases, feedback is sent. Accepted authors are informed that they have one month to incorporate changes and send the final draft

• Editorial board accepts papers for publication if revisions are acceptable. In some cases, opportunities are provided for further revisions.

Copy-Editing

• Authors return their revised papers

• Copy-editors review submissions for mechanical problems

• Authors have one week to accept or discuss copy-editing changes

• Submissions are uploaded onto website

 

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.