RIACT respects and tries to follow the key guidelines set by COPE — Committee on Publication Ethics
Submission of Texts and
The RIACT coordination maintains a permanent dialogue with the Scientific Committee members chosen to carry out the peer review. The texts and projects submitted to the Scientific Committee are assessed in two stages, through two complementary readings. In cases where one of the readings is positive and the other negative, the decision will be to accept the text at the corresponding stage.
If an article or project is accepted in the first stage, this means that the two reviewers chosen to assess the article or artistic project will be kept on for the second stage, following up that particular process of evaluation throughout. However, the assessment is totally “blind”, that is, not only submitting authors and corresponding reviewers ignore each other’s concrete identity, but reviewers also ignore who is who in the peer review process. To this end, both the texts/projects and their assessment are totally anonymized, without any references that may identify authors or institutions of the people involved, consisting of “numbers” to be assigned by RIACT’s coordination.
Whatever the assessment phase in question, candidates are tasked with the interpretation of the reviewers’ suggestions, working on them to critically assimilate what has been suggested.
The submitted proposals are conceived and formalized according to a thematic horizon proposed in each “Call for Papers”, which in turn will set one of the assessment criteria to be used in the peer review.
Candidates assume that the texts and projects submitted are original, authentic and have never been partially or fully edited in other publications or contexts, even if they have been previously published in other languages.
The languages accepted for the two phases of peer review are Portuguese, English, French, or Castilian. In cases where the texts are submitted in Portuguese, authors and artists may choose to use the current orthographic agreement or to refuse it.
Criteria for the Assessment
of Texts and Proposals
- (A) The very notion — or meta-notion — of artistic research should have a good formulation through references, purposes, contexts, among other aspects of artistic and scientific research.
- (B) Strong signs of exploration and understanding of the chosen theme, as well as the sub-themes proposed for each RIACT’s number.
- (C) Notion of artistic temporality and reflection on its peculiarity, with a clear effort to anchor the notion in the presented art pieces or artistic situations.
- (D) Notion of artistic experimentation anchored in the presented art piece or artistic situation.
- (E) Quality and relevance of the images (static or dynamic) and the artistic situations submitted.