New Episode – The Textures of Research: In Conversation with Berilsu Tarcan

Writing about web page https://open.spotify.com/episode/21ZeAct9Negsa9qzQFTK67?si=P0RZT3hKQHuQHyGyKEx1dg

A new podcast episode tackles issues around publishing design and textile based research practice.

With great delight I can reveal we've released the latest episode in our Exchanges discourse podcast series. In this new episode I talk to past journal author Berilsu Tarcan (Norwegian University of Science and Technology), about the paper she co-authored Repositioning Craft and Design in the Anthropocene: Applying a More-Than-Human approach to textiles as part of our recent special issue. We discuss the challenges of publishing design and artefact related research, as well as exploring Berilsu’s current research focus. We close with considerations and advice for authors looking to submit their papers to Exchanges and other academic journals.

Listen in here: https://open.spotify.com/episode/21ZeAct9Negsa9qzQFTK67?si=P0RZT3hKQHuQHyGyKEx1dg[32:36]

For those of you who are pressed for time and would like to skip to the salient portion of the episode - here's a time index to aid your navigation.

Episode Index

• 00:00: Opening
• 00:52: Introduction
• 05:55: Article Perspectives & Insight
• 14:34: Current Research Activities
• 19:00: Publication Feedback Experiences
• 25:00: Article Publication Advice
• 31:06: Closing Conversations
• 31:50: Outro

Gareth Johnson : 24 May 2023 10:51 |  Tags: Anthropocene Design Discourse Episode Exchanges Podcast Research Textiles |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Reflections on the Publication Strategies & Metrics Panel

Writing about web page https://warwick.ac.uk/global/europe/eutopia

Reflections from last week’s EUTOPIA-SIF panel on a couple of fascinating academic pubolication topics.

Last week I had the pleasure of hosting a panel discussion session as part of Warwick’s contribution to the EUTOPIA-SIF programme of events. To this end, I was joined by delegates from across Europe, as well as from here at Warwick to discuss a couple of topics close to my own professional interests: publication strategies and metrics. For once though, and thankfully given the challenge of the session’s theme, I wasn’t on the spot to talk about my own views but rather to enable the discourse between four wonderful panel members and the attendees. I can report from comments in the session and subsequently, that this was clearly a much-appreciated discussion opportunity.

For those of you who weren’t in the room here’s the session overview:

A major part of developing an academic track career is taking a strategic approach towards one’s publishing outputs. This helps in ensuring visibility among key audience demographics, alongside achieving credible impact and public recognition alongside generating markers of personal and professional esteem. Hence, understanding and engaging with the various publication measures of esteems – be they journal, article or personal – intrinsically resonates with any such strategic approach.

Illuminating these discussions through personal and professional insights will be a diverse group of scholars, sharing their experiences and perceptions around these crucial topics. Adopting a panel discussion format, the session will be largely contextualised and driven by attendees’ interests, questions and comments. In this way, the panel’s debates will organically evolve and resonate with the interests and concerns of the attending audience members.

In tackling these topics I was joined by a collection of academic panellists, drawn from contributors to Exchanges as authors and editors alike. These were:

• Dr Alena Cicholewski (Institute for English and American Studies, University of Oldenburg, Germany)
• Dr Huayi Huang (Usher Institute of Health and Wellbeing, The University of Edinburgh, Scotland, UK)
• Dr Ignaas Jimidar (CHIS (Chemical Engineering), Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium)
• Dr Sharon Coleclough (Department of Media, Performance and Communication, School of Digital, Technologies and Arts, Staffordshire University, Stoke-on-Trent, UK)

Ahead of the session I’d made a call for questions, as well as developing a few provocations of my own to get the ball rolling. While I’d shared these with the panel beforehand as the session was also designed to be largely driven by the delegates’ thoughts, experiences and insights of the delegates a most dynamic session ensured. Hence, after an opening question to prime the pump asking generally about publication strategic approaches, we shifted very much to an dialogic and interactive approach for the rest of the 90 minutes or so.

Strategies

While I am not going to attempt to share the full session discourse – when you’re chairing there’s only so many notes you have time to take – to offer a flavour, in terms of overall strategies some of the suggested approaches included:

• Bespoke: Remember there is no single strategic approach that works for all. Be adaptable with your publication approaches and ask yourself what you want to achieve - e.g., recognition, dissemination, career esteem or opportunities.
• Interdisciplinarity: Balance the need for advancing complex and insightful niche work, with that which straddles interdisciplinary boundaries – in terms of readers or subject matters – for maximum impact.
• Networking: View publishing as networking – consider who you are writing for and where, and use it to engender a discourse or dialogue between yourself and other key researchers. Can be the basis for an ongoing series of publications as a result.
• Potential: Publication isn’t everything – it is possible to advance to a new role without an overtly strong portfolio of past works, but having the potential to achieve more in the future is always worth stressing.
• Situtation: Understand where you are in the field, especially in terms of where you want to go and how you want to be perceived.

Following on there was also a fair amount of discussion contrasting the differences in perceptions of most esteem capital worthy works in different disciplines and fields. Certainly, comments around the (arguably unhealthy) predominance of STEM publication habits as ‘normative’ were richly represented here. These considerations were married with examinations of questions relating to single and joint lead-authors and the different advantages this might confer, alongside the challenges of breaking into an Anglophone [1] dominated publication field in some domains.

There were considerable discussions around metrics – their use and misuse in cases, and the importance of balancing your own career and output and trying not to be entirely dominated with chasing the illusive highest impact simply to amplify a quantitative score [2]. Of course, as any academic knows no matter how much we might try to resist such objectified metrification the reality is research assessment exercises such as the REF loom large in any scholar’s life. However, balancing the need to ‘feed the beast’ while still achieving the ongoing publication and research discourse you actually want to produce remains a nuanced topic.

Future Disrupters

During the panel discussions the topic of AI, as one might have expected, came under the spotlight. There was a smattering of debate considering how the panel and delegates saw it as part tool, but also something which might distort or disrupt academic scholarly communicative practices into unknown configurations in the coming years. As an ancillary to these discussions, the panel were challenged to explore those other publication technologies or developments which might be worth examining in greater detail. Suggestions included podcasts and non-textural publication routes able to reach and engage new and different audiences, alongside developments in normative peer-reviewing practices too. Certainly though, retaining a watchful eye on opportunities beyond the traditional journal and monograph vectors which might prove valuable routes to communicate research activities were agreed as an essential strategic awareness.

The session closed by the panel offering their final thoughts on, given a limited time resource, where they would recommend focussing professional attention to yield maximum result. Suggestions included seeking to be a solo or lead author wherever possible, considering how your publications promote your public, professional identity and create the backbone of your interpersonal networks. Alongside this the importance of always remembering where you were in your career journey and meeting both opportunities and need within your strategic publication aims was stressed. Certainly, the panel agreed opportunities abound in terms of being able to contribute and be recognised far beyond simply operating as an author of texts within the publication sphere.

Thanks

As always, my especial thanks to my panel quartet for their contributions and generous donation of their time and insights. From the reactions in the room, I can see that the delegates certainly were engaged by the discussions, and I hope we left them all with plenty to think over. As chair I certainly enjoyed the discussions and am still chewing over some of the comments and how they might relate to my own praxis and work on Exchanges. Naturally, I would like to extend my thanks to all the delegates too and especially to those posing questions or contributing to what was a very active chat-channel.

---

Endnotes

[1] An Anglophone and high income economy perhaps?

[2] Alternatively, to amplify just a single quantitative score perhaps?

Gareth Johnson : 23 May 2023 08:53 |  Tags: Discussions Eutopia Metrics Panel Publication Sif Strategy Workshop |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Contributor Conduct Policy Introduced

Writing about web page https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/index.php/exchanges/journal-policies

A formalisation of a longstanding operational ethos is seen with the introduction of a new contributor conduct policy

Informally ever since Exchanges was founded and certainly even more so since I took over the reins of power, the journal has been run with an operational ethos of enlightened collaboration. The idea has been that we wanted the journal to standout within the academic publishing field not so much for academic excellence [1] but more for being a title with a polite, positive and enabling demeanour attitude to contributor interactions. I am happy to report, as evidenced within our recent feedback report, [2] this approach has paid considerable dividends. From a personal perspective too, I can report how greatly I’ve enjoyed the mutual respectful and engaging interactions I had and continue to have with our contributing community – which is a credit to each of them.

Understandably though, there have been a limited number of occasions where we have experienced some issues within these interactions, with a very few not quite engaging within the same envelope of mutuality. Thankfully, we usually found a way through and back to more cordial working relationships, much to my professional relief. Nevertheless, the occasional but recurrent nature of these events suggested how more formally stating the journal’s position with respect to interpersonal engagement may be of benefit to everyone. Such a formal statement, or policy, to which we can direct people would assist everyone involved with Exchanges in maintaining our operational effectiveness and collegiality.

We are lucky, being based at the University of Warwick, to have an institution which takes matters of professional conduct and positive personal interactions seriously. The Dignity at Warwick Policy for example is a cornerstone statement demarcating the expected norms of interpersonal conduct and respect between colleagues here. Hence, even though Exchanges deals with scholars around the world, this policy strongly resonates with the attitude the journal has long espoused itself and to its contributors.

All of which is a long preamble to announcing how this week Exchanges has introduced a new, brief, policy statement, drawing on Warwick’s framework and our own operational philosophy, outlining the conduct expectations for all journal contributors. It is a policy to which I suspect I will rarely need to directly refer, given how cordial and professional are the vast majority of our working relationships and interactions. Nevertheless, I hope it will serve to clarify our expectations on contributors, and hopefully continue to help frame the journal’s operations within an effective and enlightened scholarly mode.

You can find our Contributor Conduct Policy along with all our other key operational statements, on the Journal Policy section of Exchanges' website. As always, where there are any questions, as always, the first port of call is myself as Editor-in-Chief.

---

Endnotes

[1] Although, that would be delightful too, and certainly an ongoing aspiration for us.

[2] See also my recent editorial for discussions about this report.

Gareth Johnson : 10 May 2023 09:44 |  Tags: Behaviour Conduct Dignity Interpersonal Policy Professionalism Respect |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Introducing Book Reviews: New Submission Format

Writing about web page https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/index.php/exchanges/guidance#formats

Following interest from a number of authors, Exchanges has introduced a new article submission format.

Exchanges has been approached a few times recently by authors asking if we would consider publishing critical and evaluative reviews of recent or significant texts. Looking back, over past issues, we have had some articles which arguably broadly fell into this category published as critical reviews. However, to date we had not set up a separate book reviews submission format. After a little consideration, and following a brace of recent submissions to the journal, I am happy to announce that from this latest issue of Exchanges onward we are now formally inviting authors to submit reviews of worthy and ideally recently published academic research texts. Such books may be author monographs, multivolume works or even textbooks.

Writing Book Reviews

Owing to Exchanges' audience, many of whom are early career post-graduate researchers, such book review manuscripts should be crafted by their authors to offer an introductory overview of the work under consideration intended for readers less or unfamiliar with a field. As such, as with all our articles, book reviews should seek to explore, clarify and unpick particular domain specific concepts, terms or ideas, rather than assuming automatic peer-familiarity.

Ideally, and initially, Exchanges is more interested in reviews of books published in relatively recent years, given their relative topicality and impact on scholarly discourse. However, we may consider reviews of older, established works or those of a more literary configuration too, but authors are advised to consult with the Editor-in-Chief (EIC) ahead of submission to avoid disappointment. Conversely, authors who are looking to review a spread of literature within a field, would be expected to submit a review article for peer-review consideration rather than a piece under this format.

Selection Guidelines

As per our normal submission review policies Exchanges reserves the right to decline for publication consideration any book review submissions which do not meet our base quality controls, journal scope or other policy requirements. Moreover, while book reviews will be subjected to an editorial review and revisions process before consideration for publication acceptance, they will not undergo external peer review. Authors wanting to discuss a potential book review manuscript ahead of formally submitting it to the journal for consideration, are warmly welcomed to open a dialogue with the EIC at any time. However, such pre-submission discussions are not a requirement or prerequisite for any submission.

We look forward to reading your future book review submissions to this new category with considerable interest.

Gareth Johnson : 09 May 2023 10:29 |  Tags: Announcement Book Format New Reviews Submission |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

New Issue Published: Volume 10 Number 3

Writing about web page https://doi.org/10.31273/eirj.v10i3

Spring brings with it the next regular issue of Exchanges

While it barely feels like five minutes since the last issue (it’s been about 6 weeks actually) we are pleased to announce the publication today of the Spring 2023 issue of Exchanges. This is the regularly scheduled issue of the journal, and contains a variety of articles on various topics. It also includes our first overt book review – of which more in my next blog post.

You can access the issue directly here:

And in case you were wondering what’s in it – here’s the table of contents.

• Birkett, I., 2023. Literature in Politics: The Appropriation of George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four in contemporary British parliamentary debate. pp. 1-47. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31273/eirj.v10i3.1197.
• Minoli, A., 2023. An Aesthetic Portrayal of Republican-era Shanghai: The exciting and discordant beauty of the metropolis in Zhang Ruogu’s Urban Symphony. pp. 48-61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31273/eirj.v10i3.920.
• Wakefield, M., 2023. McGahern: Lover of words, creator of worlds. pp. 62-76. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31273/eirj.v10i3.1182.
• Khair Allah, R., 2023. The Use of Miro in Teaching Practice. pp. 77-91. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31273/eirj.v10i3.1277.
• Jabri, A., 2023. The Doctor-Writer Experience of Intissar Haddiya: A Moroccan figure. pp. 92-98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31273/eirj.v10i3.1280.
• Yi, R., 2023. Review of Wang and Munday (2021) Advances in Discourse Analysis of Translation and Interpreting: Linking Linguistic Approaches with Socio-cultural Interpretation. pp. 99-104. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31273/eirj.v10i3.1290.
• Johnson, G.J., 2023. Feeding Back, Looking Forward: Editorial Volume 10, Issue 03. pp. i-xiv. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31273/eirj.v10i3.1351.

My thanks to all contributors and editors for their work on this issue, and we look forward to seeing you back for our next issue hopefully over the summer with the Pluralities of Translation special issue.

Gareth Johnson : 04 May 2023 13:26 |  Tags: 2023 Issue New Published Spring |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

New Episode: Presidential History and Digital Pedagogies

Writing about web page https://open.spotify.com/episode/0FSi6N6Uc1lICgk044UgwS?si=bKXxryr4SKiwygwLuCF_8Q

After a short break, we're back with the latest in our series of author interviews on the podcast.

Once more we bring you a discussion with one of our past authors. This time I am talking with journal author Rebecca Stone about her paper Scaling Up: The pedagogical legacy of Then & Now, as well as her work on US presidential history – especially pertaining to Harry Truman. The episode moves on to discuss pandemic lessons for effective digital pedagogies - both online and in the classroom, as well as an exploration of why it can be good in the long term for students to learn about trying and failing. As always, we touch on personal publishing experiences - good and bad - alongside offering some advice for early career and first-time academic authors in publishing a journal article.

Listen in here: https://open.spotify.com/episode/0FSi6N6Uc1lICgk044UgwS?si=bKXxryr4SKiwygwLuCF_8Q

As it's a long chat - here's the episode index so listeners can jump straight to the bit they're most interested in.

• 00:00: Opening
• 00:49: Introductions
• 02:48: Article Perspectives
• 06:15: Lockdown Pivot
• 14:52: Harry Truman & Higher Education
• 20:55: Post-Pandemic Digital Pedagogies
• 31:50: Publishing Horror Stories
• 39:02: Publishing Advice
• 43:03: Outro

As always, you can find past episodes on the journal pages: https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/index.php/exchanges/podcast

Gareth Johnson : 03 May 2023 10:44 |  Tags: Digital Episode Harry New Pedagogies Podcast Rebecca Stone Truman |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

New Exchanges Webpages Launched

Writing about web page https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/cross_fac/ias/exchanges/

As part of a revamp of web presence for the Institute of Advanced Study (IAS), where Exchanges is based, I am pleased to report that we now have a whole suite of new webpages as part of this project. Given for the past couple of years there’s only been a minimal presence of Exchanges on the IAS pages, I could not be happier in how we now have the chance to be a lot more visible as part of our wonderfully supportive department front-page.

You can find Exchanges’ new pages here: https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/cross_fac/ias/exchanges/

The hope is, more people will be able to discover the journal in this way, and perhaps consider contributing or collaborating with us in some capacity. Given the IAS’ national and international reputation as a site of scholarly excellence, I expect we’ll likely have a much wider potential audience before – than with our journal pages alone.

However, don’t worry! The original journal site remains the main primary location for hosting our author guidance, the journal and its articles themselves. These new pages though, let us represent some of that information in a more ‘bite-sized’ format, which some people may find more illuminating or readily accessible. We have also taken the opportunity to expand out on some areas – like what our editors do, profiling the EIC and exploring the steps needed to initiate a special issue project.

Hence, on the new pages you can jump into information about things such as our operations and mission, how to contribute and engage with us, plus news and updates on our social media presence, training agenda and notably our podcast too. I hope you find them useful, and if there’s anything about the journal you’d wish we’d included – leave a comment or get in touch.

Gareth Johnson : 02 May 2023 16:03 |  Tags: Ias News Site Update Visibility Webpages |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Special Issue: Anthropocene and More–than–Human–Worlds Published

Writing about web page https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/index.php/exchanges/issue/view/45

Issue 10.2 of the Exchanges journal is another special one.

Myself and colleagues are delighted to announce the publication of the latest special issue of the Exchanges journal. This issue contains contributions inspired by and from participants to the associated British Academy funded research project and workshop series. The workshops, centred around the theme of the 'more-than-human-world' ran online during late 2021 and saw scholars from around the world come together to talk about, and develop, their writing practice, around the project's area of interest.

Many of the participants also took the opportunity to contribute to this associated special issue, and I am grateful to each of them for their efforts in this regard.

For your ease of reading – here’s the issue’s table of contents:

---

Exchanges Volume 10 Issue 2 (March 2023): https://doi.org/10.31273/eirj.v10i2 & https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/index.php/exchanges/issue/view/45

Price, C., 2023. Saying Goodbye and Fighting for the Future. Exchanges: The Interdisciplinary Research Journal, 10(2), 1-4. Available at: https://doi.org/10.31273/eirj.v10i2.1343.

Cicholewski, A., 2023. Empathy as an Answer to Challenges of the Anthropocene in Asian American Young Adult Science Fiction. Exchanges: The Interdisciplinary Research Journal, 10(2), 5-25. DOI: 10.31273/eirj.v10i2.958.

Tarcan, B., Pettersen, I.N., & Edwards, F., 2023. Repositioning Craft and Design in the Anthropocene: Applying a More-Than-Human approach to textiles. Exchanges: The Interdisciplinary Research Journal, 10(2), 26-49. DOI: 10.31273/eirj.v10i2.973.

Price, C., 2023. Do we need Artificial Pollination if we have Multispecies Justice in the Anthropocene? Exchanges: The Interdisciplinary Research Journal, 10(2), 50-73. DOI: 10.31273/eirj.v10i2.966.

Westgate, J., 2023. Corals, Geo-Sociality, and Anthropocene Dwelling. Exchanges: The Interdisciplinary Research Journal, 10(2), 74-105. DOI: 10.31273/eirj.v10i2.979.

Vieira, N., 2023. Whales Lost and Found. Rescuing a history of biodiversity loss in early modern Brazil. Exchanges: The Interdisciplinary Research Journal, 10(2), 106-130. DOI: 10.31273/eirj.v10i2.976.

Srivastava, S., 2023. Res(crip)ting the Gaze: Agency and the aesthetics of disability in ‘Animal’s People’. Exchanges: The Interdisciplinary Research Journal, 10(2), 131-143. DOI: 10.31273/eirj.v10i2.1127.

Melian-Morse, A., 2023. Teaching to Care for Land as Home: Thinking beyond the Anthropocene in environmental education. Exchanges: The Interdisciplinary Research Journal, 10(2), 144-162. DOI: 10.31273/eirj.v10i2.969.

Ressiore, A., & van de Pavert, M., 2023. Caring with the Non-Human: Reciprocity in market gardening. Exchanges: The Interdisciplinary Research Journal, 10(2), 163-176. DOI: 10.31273/eirj.v10i2.972.

Price, C., & Chao, S., 2023. Multispecies, More-Than-Human, Non-Human, Other-Than-Human: Reimagining idioms of animacy in an age of planetary unmaking. Exchanges: The Interdisciplinary Research Journal, 10(2), 177-193. DOI: 10.31273/eirj.v10i2.1166.

Johnson, G.J., 2023. I’ve Seen the Future, and it Will Be: Editorial, Volume 10, Part 2. Exchanges: The Interdisciplinary Research Journal, 10(2), i-xii. DOI: 10.31273/eirj.v10i2.1340.

---

Naturally, my great thanks to Catherine Price and Amy Gibbons as special issue lead and associate editor on this issue. Plus, thanks to my editors and reviewers who also helped us bring this issue to publication.

Should you be reading this and think ‘Could Exchanges help us publish a special issue?’ – please do get in touch! We are more than happy to talk you through the processes and offer advice, without any commitment. However, as past collaborators will tell you, it can be an enriching and rewarding experience for everyone involved!

Gareth Johnson : 29 Mar 2023 10:28 |  Tags: Anthropocene Issue More-Than-Human-World Published Special |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

New Episode – Interdisciplinarity & Publishing – Panel Discussion

Writing about web page https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/index.php/exchanges/podcast

A new feature length episode of the podcast arrives to offer a lively insight into interdisciplinary research.

After a brief pause, I’m delighted to announce the launch of a new episode of the Exchanges Discourse podcast. It’s taken a few weeks to find a perfect date for all my guests to appear at once, but I think you’ll agree it was worthwhile. Listen in here:

• Interdisciplinarity & Publishing: A Panel Discussion https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/exchangesias/episodes/Interdisciplinarity--Publishing-A-Panel-Discussion-e20tbhj [56m50s]

In this very special panel discussion episode, I talk with four scholars from around the globe about the art, science and everything in between of interdisciplinarity and academic publishing. In a lively exchange the panel members explore their perceptions of what is, and what might not be, interdisciplinary work, with particular reference to publishing research articles. Along the way, the panel also takes a view on what a broader academic reader wants along with considering practicalities of reviewing and publishing articles incorporating an interdisciplinary voice, mode or perspective. We even touch on issues of integration within academic scholarship to a degree.

The episode features guest panellists: Alena Cicholewski (University of Oldenburg, Germany), Sharon Coleclough (Staffordshire University, UK), Huayi Huang (University of Edinburgh, UK) & Kwasu David Tembo (Ashesi University, Accra, Ghana). My thanks to each of them for their time and input to the episode.

As this is – officially- the longest episode we’ve ever produced, listeners might want to avail themselves of the episode index below – so they can jump in to the most relevant moment of the episode.

Episode Index

• 00:00 Opening
• 01:00 Panel Introductions
• 03:00 Defining ‘Interdisciplinary’
• 09:08 Interdisciplinary Fringes
• 17:06 Satisfying Interdisciplinary Audiences
• 27:12 Writing in an Interdisciplinary Mode
• 34:42 Peer Reviewing Interdisciplinary Texts
• 42:30 Knowledge & Integration
• 51:40 Practical Advice on Publishing Interdisciplinary Work
• 56:04 Outro

As always, for more on publishing with Exchanges, the interdisciplinary research journal, see our online guide for authors.

Gareth Johnson : 22 Mar 2023 10:57 |  Tags: Discussion Episode Interdisciplinarity New Panel Podcast Publishing |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

A Positive Experience with a Highly Regarded Journal: Author Feedback Review

It’s important to listen to contributors, and in this piece, the EIC reviews the formal author feedback from the past three years.

• [I approached the journal because] A colleague spoke highly of the process and the journal's reputation. (author #1, feedback)

For many years now, we’ve asked every author who’s published in Exchanges to tell us about how they found the experience. Not all of them take up the offer, but many do, and I’m deeply grateful to each one for the thoughts they have shared. In fact, over the past three years[1] fully 53% of all authors have taken the time to reflect on publishing with us via our online survey form. As a result, it has been possible to create a snapshot of the journal’s perceptions within its core contributing community, along with a evaluative account of their experiences within the editorial journey. I recently collated and analysed the feedback for 2020-2022, and I have to say the result was wonderful! I certainly was not expecting the comments to be quite as positive as they were.

• I was rejected by three discipline-specific journals, but realise actually that the interdisciplinary nature of my article made Exchanges perfect, and I was reassured by the positive, constructive and professional response to my informal query and the emphasis on ECRs (author #2, feedback)

What these results principally demonstrate is how Exchanges, its EIC and editorial team, along with its present operational ethos are all strongly valued by our contributing authors. Interestingly, the journal’s operational transparency, interdisciplinary remit and editorial regime were all stressed as particular highlights by authors. This is fantastic, as I would personally point to all three of these as specific strengths or perhaps unique selling points Exchanges offers to its current and potential authorial community. Even more gratifying, in response to questions about how we could improve, almost 70% of all those responding either said ‘nothing’ or took the opportunity to offer further praise for the journal and team. While I am proud of the journal and all my editorial colleagues, I was really not expecting to come in for such (all-but) universal praise in this part of the survey. Tea and medals all-around, I think!

• I have no inhibitions in saying that out of the 6 peer-reviewed publications, and the 9 rejections (including an initial editorial rejection) I have had, Exchanges has been the most author-friendly experience by quite a margin. (author #3, feedback)

Seriously though, there were a few minor areas of unsatisfied technical or procedural development identified. I am not surprised, as the chief editor I am more than aware of many aspects of the journal, our hosting platform or even our operational protocols which could benefit from a re-examination. Certainly, for example, some authors felt the duration of review or time taken to obtain feedback could have been better. I would agree, my desire is always for speedy, but quality assured, reviewing. However, I must counter how from an editorial and reviewer standpoint, onboarding reviewers who are knowledgeable and willing to contribute their insights is never an easy task for my editors. Indeed, I’ve heard from other, larger and (dare I say it) more major journal editors how they face exactly the same problem.[2] So, while I appreciate this point, I fear it is more of a universal issue with reviewing than simply our title’s approach.

• The journal seemed very welcoming to early-career researchers and researchers who were looking to publish their first article. The interdisciplinary nature also aligned with my research and the article’s content. (author #4, feedback)

Beyond their concerns, we also asked what journal authors would like to see developed by Exchanges in terms of services, options or features. More themed special issues or calls for papers were the aspects with most uniform degree of high interest, which is gratifying. I really relish working with colleagues on special issues – as editorial leads and associate editors alike, it really helps us deliver on our title’s missions. Altmetrics and the ability for readers to comment on articles followed in importance, which considering we introduced the former last year is gratifying. I remain conflicted as to the latter – personally I delight in the discourse on and around publications, but I am concerned how much monitoring or even active policing this might be on the platform.[3] Certainly, it is an interesting option but I’m not seeing a groundswell of demand for it yet. Conversely, where there was more limited interest was in terms of hard copies of the journal – which is a relief, as arranging print production is not that straightforward an endeavour. Very limited interest in multimedia abstracts appeared too, so I won’t be focussing on these any time soon either.

• I've had a positive experience and fair and strict treatment here before, so I enjoy submitting here now. (author #5, feedback)

So, going on what does the outcome of this feedback review mean for the journal? Well, in part it will drive an update and refresh of the survey instrument to reflect the last three years of development for the title. It also underscores the importance for increasing the visibility and breadth within our potential contributing community. I strongly suspect there are many, many authors who would greatly value discovering Exchanges, but how and where we reach them has always been a challenge. I’m happy to report I’m talking actively with the IAS itself and fellow journal editors at Warwick about just how we raise our collective heads further above the parapet. The message here is clear: publishing with Exchanges is an excellent authorial experience…but you just need to know we exist first!

---

My thanks to all the editors, associate editors, reviewers and authors[4] who have worked so hard to make the journal the successful experience it has been, and I would hope continues to be.

---

Endnotes

• [1] That would be for all issues published 2020-2022, or 7 journals in total.
• [2] I suspect the recent UCU industrial action will not have helped matters – and that’s before you factor in the challenging work regime faced by so many of our colleagues.
• [3] Let alone running through any legal liability this might open the journal to.
• [4] Especially those who took the time to complete the feedback!

Gareth Johnson : 07 Mar 2023 10:00 |  Tags: Analysis Author Feedback Metrics Perceptions Reflection Report |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem