Focus and Scope
The Journal Interfaces opens an interdisciplinary and multilingual forum for the study of medieval European literatures. These literatures are broadly conceived as the products of the interconnected textual cultures which flourished between Late Antiquity and the Renaissance in a region extending from the North Atlantic to the Eastern Mediterranean. Interfaces envisages the study of the textual culture of medieval Europe as situated at the intersection of a number of modern disciplines, including history, literature, philology, codicology, philosophy, sociolinguistics, and theology.
Contributions are invited which cross linguistic or disciplinary boundaries in the recognition that the vitality of medieval texts in present-day scholarship and culture demands a space not confined by single philologies, national research traditions, confessions, or disciplinary canons. Interfaces strives to combine methodological questioning of hermeneutic and didactic practices with the opening up of new common themes, new connections between literatures, and new transdisciplinary conceptualisations of the modern understanding of medieval literatures, including regional and global challenges to claims of European unity.
It is the ambition of Interfaces to publish the best new scholarship which will contribute to a redefining of how the medieval textual heritage of Europe is read, researched, taught and disseminated in the 21st century. European medieval civilization – of which Greek, Hebrew, Slavonic, and Arabic textual cultures form an integral but often neglected part – will continue to be an important source of cultural identity in a globalised world and the global perspectives of the 21st century impel us to ask new questions of the medieval past. The changing forms and technologies of literature and historical writing in the present also urges us to engage with pre-modern writing in new ways. The texts transmitted to us from the Middle Ages and how we read them are a crucial site for negotiating the relationship between modernity and the past.
Interfaces promotes new types of high quality scholarship as well as make the case for the historical, intellectual, and aesthetic value of the literatures of a broadly conceived medieval Europe.
As a peer-reviewed, non-profit, multilingual, open access journal, Interfaces also forms part of a new democratic and efficient research culture within the Humanities. The journal will regularly feature thematic issues but usually with space for other articles as well. In order to promote multilingualism in the choice of topics as well as in the interaction between scholars, Interfaces invites papers and debate comments in the five main scholarly languages of the field (English, German, Spanish, Italian, French), all with abstracts in English.
Peer Review Process
Each submitted manuscript that passes the preliminary review by the Editors-in-Chief and the Editorial Board is generally reviewed by at least two external reviewers under a double-blind peer review process where both the reviewers and the authors are kept anonymous.
Reviewers are asked to evaluate the manuscript based on its originality, scholarly relevance, soundness of methodology, solidity of argumentation, and appropriateness to the journal’s aims and areas of interest. Peer Reviewers are asked to assess research and publication ethics issues and inform the Editors of any conflict of interest that might be perceived as relevant.
The review process usually takes 4 to 10 weeks.
Interfaces is published at least once a year.
Open Access Policy
Interfaces provides immediate open access to its content on the principles that publicly funded research must be freely accessible to the public and that making research freely available supports a greater global exchange of knowledge and fosters progress.
Interfaces does not charge either submission or publication fees nor article-processing expenses.
Publisher copyright policies and self-archiving:
- Authors retain the copyright of their works
- Authors can archive post-print (i.e. final draft post-refereeing)
- Authors can archive publisher's version/pdf
SHERPA/RoMEO classification: Green = Authors can archive pre-print and post-print or publisher's version/pdf.
The University of Milan has an archival arrangement with the National Central Libraries of Florence and Rome within the national project Magazzini Digitali.
The journal has enabled the PKP PN (Preservation Network) plugin, in order to preserve digital contents through LOCKSS (Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe) project
Editors have a duty to act promptly in case of errors and misconducts, both proven and alleged. This duty extends to both published and unpublished papers. In case such as errors in articles or in the publication process, fraudulent publication or plagiarism, appropriate steps will be taken, following the recommendations, guidelines and flowcharts from di COPE. Corrections will happen with due prominence, including the publication of an erratum (errors from the publication process), corrigendum (errors from the Author(s)) or, in the most severe cases, the retraction of the affected work. Retracted papers will be retained online, and they will be prominently marked as a retraction in all online versions, including the PDF, for the benefit of future readers.
Interfaces is indexed by:
- DOAJ - The Directory of Open Access Journals
- ERIH PLUS - The European Reference Index for the Humanities and the Social Sciences
- IMB - The International Medieval Bibliography
It is registered for regular aggregation and indexing in OpenAIRE - The Open Access Infrastructure for Research in Europe.
The Italian National Agency for the Evaluation of Universities and Research Institutes (ANVUR) has ranked Interfaces as "rivista di Classe A" (the highest ranking possible) in the following academic disciplines: 10E1 - Filologie e letterature mediolatine e romanze; 10F4 - Critica letteraria e letterature comparate; 10L1 - Lingue, letterature e culture inglese e anglo-americana; 10M1 - Lingue, letterature e culture germaniche; 10M2 - Slavistica.
In Denmark and Norway Interfaces is presently ranked in the second category of journals in the humanities.
[The present document is based on: Kleinert, Sabine, and Elizabeth Wager. "Responsible research publication: international standards for editors. A position statement developed at the 2nd World Conference on Research Integrity, Singapore, July 22-24, 2010." Promoting Research Integrity in a Global Environment. Edited by Tony Mayer and Nicholas Steneck. Singapore: World Scientific, 2011. 317–28. Ch. 51. It is also informed by the "Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors" published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).]
1 Accountability and Responsibility for Journal Content
The Editors of Interfaces take responsibility for everything they publish. They strive to grant both scientific and editorial quality by double-blind peer review and careful editing. The Journal maintains the integrity of the published record and grants long time preservation of all published content by using the LOCKKS system.
2 Editorial Independence and Integrity
2.1 Independence of Editorial Decisions from Commercial Interests
The Editors of Interfaces make their decisions about proposals submitted to the Journal on academic merit alone and take full responsibility for their decisions. Interfaces embraces an open access policy and has no commercial interest, so the Journal’s editorial processes and Editors’ decisions are independent of any commercial consideration.
2.2 Editors’ Relationship to the Journal Publisher
The Editors of Interfaces work on a volunteer basis. The Journal’s website is hosted by the Università degli Studi di Milano, a public institution which has a scientific research and teaching mission and does not interfere with the Editors’ freedom of choice and activities, as long as their work is coherent with the scholarly mission of the Journal.
2.3 Journal Metrics and Decision-Making
The Editors of Interfaces do not attempt to influence the Journal’s ranking by artificially increasing any journal metric. In particular, they strive to ensure that submitted papers are reviewed on purely scholarly grounds and that Authors are not pressured to cite specific publications for non-scholarly reasons.
3 Editorial Confidentiality
3.1 Authors’ Material
Interfaces selects papers to be published through double-blind peer review. Peer Reviewers are chosen by Editors, who strive to protect the confidentiality of Authors’ material and remind Reviewers to do so as well. Submitted papers are never shared with editors of other journals, unless with the Authors’ agreement or in cases of alleged misconduct (see below). Editors do not give any indication of a paper’s status with the Journal to anyone other than the Authors. Interfaces’ web-based submission system prevents unauthorised access. In the case of a misconduct investigation, it may be necessary to disclose material to third parties (e.g., an institutional investigation committee or other editors).
Interfaces selects papers to be published through double-blind peer review. Therefore, Reviewers’ identities are always protected, unless an alleged or suspected Reviewer’s misconduct compels the journal to disclose the Reviewer’s name to a third party.
General Editorial Policies
4 Encourage Maximum Transparency and Good Publishing Ethics
Interfaces aims at granting Authors, Readers, Reviewers, and all other Parties involved maximum transparency and complete and honest reporting about its work.
4.1 Authorship and Responsibility
All signing Authors of works published on Interfaces take responsibility for the conduct and validity of their research and for what is written in their contributions. They also share ownership of Authors’ rights (all contents are published under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International). Should any authorship dispute arise, it will be resolved at the appropriate institutional level or through other appropriate independent bodies. The Editors of Interfaces will then act on the findings, for example by correcting authorship in published works.
4.2 Conflicts of Interest and Role of the Funding Source
Authors are required to declare any relevant financial or non-financial conflict of interest at the moment they submit their papers for publication on Interfaces. Declarations of conflicting interests are published alongside the paper so that readers are informed about them.
4.3 Authors’ Publishing Ethics
The Editors of Interfaces work to ensure that all published papers make a substantial new contribution to their field. They discourage ‘salami publications’ (i.e., publication of the minimum publishable unit of research), avoid duplicate or redundant publication unless it is fully declared and acceptable to all (e.g., publication in a different language with cross-referencing), and encourage Authors to place their work in the context of previous work.
5 Responding to Criticisms and Concerns
Interfaces welcomes and encourages criticism and debate.
5.1 Ensuring Integrity of the Published Record – Corrections
When genuine errors in works published on Interfaces, which do not render the work invalid, are pointed out by Readers, Authors, or Editors a correction (or erratum) will be published as soon as possible. The paper will be corrected with a date of correction. If the error renders the work or substantial parts of it invalid, the paper will be retracted with an explanation as to the reason for retraction (i.e., honest error). Retracted papers will be retained online, and they will be prominently marked as a retraction in all online versions, including the PDF, for the benefit of future readers.
5.2 Ensuring the Integrity of the Published Record – Suspected Research or Publication Misconduct
If serious concerns are raised by Readers, Reviewers, or others, about the conduct, validity, or reporting of works published on Interfaces, the Editors of the Journal will initially contact the Authors and allow them to respond to the concerns. If that response is unsatisfactory, Editors will take the matter to the appropriate institutional level. The Editors of Interfaces will also do their best to respond to findings from research integrity organisations that indicate misconduct relating to works published on Interfaces. Editors can themselves decide to retract a paper if they are convinced that serious misconduct has happened even if an investigation by an institution or national body does not recommend it. Editors will respond to all allegations or suspicions of research or publication misconduct raised by Readers, Reviewers, or other Editors. In general, they acknowledge collective responsibility for the research record of the journal and will act whenever they become aware of potential misconduct if at all possible.
5.3 Encourage Scholarly Debate
Interfaces welcomes Readers’ criticisms to works published by the journal and will consider publishing them to foster scientific debate, as long as they are proposed in a timely manner. The Authors of the original works will be given the opportunity to reply to further promote the debate. Any criticisms that raise the possibility of misconduct will be further investigated even if they are received a long time after publication.
6 Ensuring a Fair and Appropriate Peer Review Process
The Editors of Interfaces organize and use peer review fairly and wisely. The peer review process is clearly explained in the Peer Review Process section on the Journal’s website.
6.1 Decision Whether To Review
The Editors of Interfaces may reject a paper without peer review when it is deemed unsuitable for the Journal’s readers or is of poor quality. This decision is made in a fair and unbiased way and the criteria used to make this decision are made explicit to the Author. The decision not to send a paper for peer review is only based on the academic content of the paper, and it is not influenced by the nature of the authors or their host institution.
6.2 Interaction With Peer Reviewers
The Editors of Interfaces use appropriate Peer Reviewers for papers that are considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest. The Editors of Interfaces ensure that reviews are received in a timely manner. Peer Reviewers are told what is expected of them and are informed about any changes in editorial policies. Peer Reviewers are asked to assess research and publication ethics issues (i.e., whether they think the research was done and reported ethically, or if they have any suspicions of plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, or redundant publication). The Editors of Interfaces have a policy to request a formal conflict of interest declaration from Peer Reviewers and ask Peer Reviewers to inform them about any such conflict of interest at the earliest opportunity so that they can make a decision on whether an unbiased review is possible. Certain conflicts of interest may disqualify a Peer Reviewer. The Editors of Interfaces stress confidentiality of the material to Peer Reviewers.
6.3 Reviewer misconduct
The Editors of Interfaces take Reviewer misconduct seriously and pursue any allegation of breach of confidentiality, non-declaration of conflicts of interest (financial or non-financial), inappropriate use of confidential material, or delay of peer review for competitive advantage. Allegations of serious reviewer misconduct, such as plagiarism, are taken to the institutional level.
6.4 Interaction with Authors
The Editors of Interfaces make it clear to Authors that the role of the Peer Reviewer is to provide recommendations on acceptance or rejection. Correspondence from Editors is usually with the Corresponding Author, who has the responsibility to involve Co-Authors at all stages. The Editors of Interfaces communicate with all Authors at first submission and at final acceptance stage to ensure all authors are aware of the submission and have approved the publication. Normally, the Editors of Interfaces pass on all Peer Reviewers’ comments in their entirety. However, in exceptional cases, it may be necessary to exclude parts of a review, if it, for example, contains libellous or offensive remarks. The Editors of Interfaces guarantee that such editorial discretion is not inappropriately used to suppress inconvenient comments. Should there be good reasons to involve additional Reviewers at a late stage in the process, it is clearly communicated to authors. The final editorial decision and reasons for this are clearly communicated to Authors and Reviewers. If a paper is rejected, the Editors of Interfaces welcome appeals from authors. Editors, however, are not obliged to overturn their decision.
7 Editorial Decision-Making
The Editors of Interfaces guarantee that decisions on publications are as fair and unbiased as possible. All editorial processes are made clear in the Profile and Submissions sections on the Journal’s webpage, where it is stated what is expected of Authors, which types of papers are published, and how papers are handled by the Journal. All Editors are fully familiar with the Journal policies, vision, and scope. The final responsibility for all decisions rests with the managing Editors.