Category: Journals

What Does a Journal Editor Do?

I assumed the role of Provenance editor in January 2012. My only experience was peer-reviewing a few articles, but I had expressed my interest in doing more. A friend/colleague was on the SGA Board, and recommended me for the position. I met with the then-Editor and then-SGA President, alerting them to the fact that I most likely wasn’t going to be in Georgia much longer (only a few months away from my project position ending). Because most everything is done over email now, they agreed.

I had some guidance from the previous editor, but he also encouraged me to do what I wanted. It took me about 2 years before I believed I had a handle on everything. That’s not to say that I knew (or know) everything, but the process became smoother. I truly enjoy it, but know there is still much to learn. I consider myself very lucky and am grateful to have this opportunity.

When I started, we weren’t yet using the online system. I used spreadsheets and email folders for tracking, and it was tricky. Just before leaving Atlanta, Kennesaw State University agreed to include Provenance in their digital commons. It helps tremendously, though it still takes a lot of checking and paying attention to details.

My role as editor includes: sending out CFP to various listservs; reviewing all submissions; assigning submissions to peer-reviewers; assessing reviewer feedback; communicating with authors; overseeing a nine member board plus managing editor, reviews editor, and indexer; soliciting articles; keeping up with recent publications for book reviews; creating the final order of content; and copyediting final publication.

Being an editor is not a solo activity. I rely on my board, as they and others peer-review all articles. The associate editor is a peer-reviewer and helps with CFPs and other administrative tasks. The reviews editor coordinates acquiring books, assigning them to reviewers, and editing the reviews. The managing editor formats the journal for publication, works with the printer, coordinates the mailing, and creates the final PDFs. It’s a collaborative activity. And, of course, none of this is possible without the authors.

The bulk of what I do is communicating with authors or potential authors. I receive emails asking if a topic or article is appropriate and I try to be encouraging. As I noted in an earlier post, I believe everyone should have an opportunity to write if they want to. I enjoy working with authors, whether prior to submission or for revisions to accepted articles.

Although it’s a lot of work, I get great satisfaction seeing the final product. Sharing ideas, practices, theories, and anything archival helps archivists learn. We all have so much to share and this is only one outlet to facilitate the exchange of ideas.

The Importance of Submission Guidelines

I received a suggestion to discuss following submission guidelines for journals. While it seems simple enough, I (as have other editors) have received submissions where it’s apparent guidelines were not thoroughly read. There are some flexibility and at times there are minor issues if not followed accurately, but it’s very helpful for editors when submissions adhere to the guidelines.

One of the most obvious, and the most challenging for both author and editor, is citations. Most journals use Chicago style, but library or other programs may use APA or MLA. The percentage of submissions I’ve received formatted in other than Chicago is small, luckily, but I have asked authors to redo citations. It is a tedious process to redo, and I’m sure not enjoyed by author nor editor. I’m most comfortable with Chicago style, as that’s what is used for Provenance, and what I used in my history PhD program. Even though I’ve been using it for years, I regularly use the quick guide to make sure formatting is correct. I know that authors will make errors and that’s okay, as long as overall it follows the appropriate style. Library or other programs may not use Chicago, so if an author is submitting a paper written for a class that creates extra work. It’s well worth investing the time. More about citations in a future post.

Because scholarly journals are peer-reviewed, it’s important that authors not include their name on the submission. This is something fairly easy for an editor to fix, but it is an extra step that can easily be alleviated. Margins, page numbering, type of document (such as Word), how to include illustrations, and length are all easy requirements to adhere to.

Authors have a responsibility to read the guidelines. To my knowledge, no article will be denied if it doesn’t adhere to guidelines, at least for Provenance. However, editors greatly appreciate it when authors follow instructions. My advice is for authors to read the guidelines multiple times as they work on submissions.

In return, journals have a responsibility to authors to provide clear guidelines. Provenance‘s guidelines are few and straightforward. American Archivist not only provides guidelines, but many tips on writing different types of submissions. I frequently refer authors to this site as I find it very helpful. Archival Issues has an extensive style guide. Journal of Archival Organization, Archivaria, Journal of Western Archives, and other journals provide detailed guidelines.

A challenge for authors is that all journals have different requirements. In a quick review of the ones mentioned, all are very different. Provenance has few requirements, while Archival Issues has an extensive style guide. When in doubt, email the editor. I regularly answer questions prior to receiving a submission and I appreciate when authors take initiative to ensure it meets the requirements. These questions also help an editor clarify guidelines; if one person has a question, others probably do too. Previous Provenance guidelines mentioned “embedding” footnotes and I received numerous questions about this. It referenced formatting used long ago, and because of the questions I removed that stipulation. I want the guidelines to be helpful so questions and feedback will help strengthen them for future authors.

Guidelines exist to help both the author and editor. For the author, the help create a solid submission. For the editor, they help with putting the journal together. Authors that closely pay attention to the guidelines make editors happy. In my experience, most submissions have done well but I’ve heard from other editors who have had more challenges. It only takes a few minutes to read through them, especially if over time you submit to multiple journals. The editors will appreciate your efforts.

Open Access Part 2

A few weeks ago I wrote about open access. Upon further reflection, what I did not address are defunct journals; I only looked at active ones. It’s quite a project to find defunct journals, much less whether they are available online. However, these journals also deserve mention as it is not just the current journals that contribute to our scholarly history.

I decided to do a little digging. My search was minimal and I know I did not find all of them, so please let me know of others. While some of these journals may be forgotten, if we can find them in print that can lead to advocating for making the content available.

I started by searching WorldCat. I used “archives” and “library” as keywords and limited to serials, which yielded nearly 4,000 results. I found a subject heading for Archives–Periodicals, which brought the number down to about 2,600. Of course, many were not archival scholarly journals but here’s a few that I found:

Available online:
The Archivist (Public Archives of Canada): https://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/publications/archivist-magazine/index-e.html
The Canadian Archivist: http://archivists.ca/content/canadian-archivist

Available in print:
Pennsylvania Archives
Archives (British Records Association)
Ms. Archivist

This exercise allowed me to find current journals I wasn’t aware of, including African Journal of Library, Archives, and Information Science, Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals, The Indian Archives, and Journal of the South African Society of Archivists (now added to the Journals list).

I’d love to hear about other journals that are no longer in print or are not open access. Perhaps if we identify these, we can figure out ways to advocate to make them available online.

Open Access

I received a request to discuss “the fact that so many archives journals are not available to many archivists because they do not eventually become open access” (thank you for submitting a topic!). This is a challenging topic, not just in archives journals but scholarly publishing in all fields.

In 2014, I finished a two-year project to put the back issues of Provenance and Georgia Archive online. This was in progress when I became Editor in 2012 and went back several years (see my article in Archival Outlook for details and history). Since both went online and including the 2013 special issue on advocacy, there have been about 30,000 downloads/views of articles and full issues. The numbers are gratifying and indicate that archivists desired, and use, this resource. Archivaria went online in 2006, American Archivist in 2007, and AA published “Open-Access Publishing and Transforming of the American Archivist Online” in 2011. This article has a great overview of the complexities and definitions of open access. And Hathi Trust has some content available.

In particular, I want to briefly comment on point 5 (p. 487). With Provenance, we paid to digitize the back issues. Though not an exorbitant amount, it was a factor. We were very lucky and I’m eternally grateful to Kennesaw State University, who agreed to host the journal free of charge through their digital commons. Costs are not just hosting (annual subscription with Bepress), but also design of the interface, which they also didn’t charge us for. Academic institutions are often in the best place to provide this service, which means that small, non-profit, and/or non-academic affiliated institutions have an extra challenge to figure out open access.

Lastly, there are the costs of human labor to initiate as well as sustain the journal. I can’t say how many hours Kennesaw staff put in, and though I didn’t track closely I estimate I put in at least 300 hours (volunteer) to get the journals online. As noted in my AO article, this was contact with the vendor, quality control on all the files, and creating metadata. I spent a lot of time correcting skewed pages, cropping, and saving individual articles for better access. At over 600 PDF files and thousands of pages, it took several months. Though both journals have been available for more than a year, I still make behind-the-scenes tweaks (and correcting spelling errors) on a regular basis and am continually learning how to navigate the system. It’s been a great experience and I’m glad to have the opportunity, but it definitely takes time and commitment. It was more than 10 years from when it was first proposed by a previous editor until completed last year.

The submitted question prompted me to go through the list I compiled and do an unscientific analysis. Having never explored these journals with the specific point to see if back issues were available, I am surprised, and pleased, at how many provide access to back issues. However, I did not go through to see specific dates of embargoes, therefore I don’t know precisely the amount of access. The above question didn’t provide specific examples of what he/she was looking for, so if I’ve overlooked something let me know.

Several new journals purposely opted for open access: Archive Journal, Archival Practice, Journal of Contemporary Archival Studies, Journal of Western Archives, Practical Technology for Archives, The Reading Room: A Journal for Special Collections, and SLIS Connecting. Others created an online platform for back and current issues (see list, and let me know if any journals are missing), and just this past June IASA made their journal and bulletin available. The majority provide access to back issues, though often recent issues are embargoed. I found that The Moving Image is available in JSTOR, recent issues of Archives and Manuscripts is available through Taylor & Francis, though one has to have a subscription to access those databases. Archives and Records and COMMA (both international journals) are pay or subscription only. Some journals restrict access as a member benefit; if one pays to belong to an organization, access to the journal is one of the perks. Academic archivists and students are more likely to have access to some or all of these through their institutions, but that leaves out non-academics. That is an unfortunate, and detrimental, example of the digital divide within our profession. I wish I had suggestions on how to reconcile that.

I agree, having all content, especially back issues, is a resource we all desire and can benefit from. Reading literature helps us grow as archivists and have a deeper knowledge of our profession. I do understand the business side of it too. What I don’t agree with are the companies or journals, like Elsevier, that ask authors to pay to have their content open access, and it seems to be a trend in science journals (read an explanation in Nature). In my opinion, that’s unethical and goes against the purpose of scholarship. As we are in the business of providing access to information, I’m glad that (to my knowledge) library and archives journals are not likely to go that route.

Publishing, in general, is in transition in our digital age. It has been for a while and in my opinion I think it will be some time, if ever, before it settles down. E-books, self-publishing, open access journals, institutional repositories, and so forth are transforming the options to disseminate information. I do hope that more journals provide open access to back issues, and someday current, and that we continue our practices of sharing information.