NAIS Editorial Policies
Peer Review and Conflict of Interest Policy
NAIS editors take great care to minimize actual and potential conflicts of interest in the editorial process. Discussions and deliberations about submissions from editors, editorial board members, editorial managers, and current or past students of the editors do not include the person with the conflict until a final decision is made on the manuscript. For instance, a submission by a former graduate student of one of the editors is handled with no input from that editor. Instead, the co-editor will ask a member of the editorial board to work with him or her in consideration of the manuscript.
With the exception of reviews, all material published in NAIS undergoes anonymous, double-blind peer review.
NAIS welcomes work that is the product of collaborative authorship. The journal’s standard practice is to list co-authors alphabetically. We will, on request, list authors in the order of their request to conform to disciplinary or other professional conventions.
Requirements for Manuscripts
Manuscripts not blinded or appropriately formatted will be returned.
Authors must certify that the manuscript is not being considered by another publisher.
NAIS prefers manuscripts prepared according to Chicago Manual of Style but authors may use their choice of disciplinary-specific style guides.
NAIS accepts only one feature length or Notes From the Field manuscript at a time from an author (or co-author). If a manuscript is under review, the Editorial Team cannot accept another manuscript (either single authored or co-authored) until the first manuscript clears the editorial review process. Reviews are exempt from this policy.
Complaints and Queries