STATEMENT AND AIMS of POPULAR INQUIRY
Popular Inquiry: The Journal of the Aesthetics of Kitsch, Camp and Mass Culture is a double-blind reviewed journal. We devote it for academic research – mainly philosophical analysis and reflection on kitsch, camp and mass culture, i.e. broadly speaking popular culture, including folk and mass media. We are also open for interdisciplinary approaches and social sciences (e.g. cultural studies), as long as there is philosophical reflection and/or an aesthetic perspective included. We publish the journal twice a year. Mainly, annually one issue is open, and one is a theme issue (often with guest editors). We have no economical support for running the journal so everything is kind of ‘hand-made’ and/or ‘home-cooked’. But we are supported by an international advisory board. The names and the affiliations of our advisory board are provided on our website (https://www.popularinquiry.com/editors-board). We contact the board regularly for possible ideas on special issue and future plans. The board also helps us to recruit potential reviewers. Our policy with reviewers is simple: if they are late or inaccurate (even worse: inappropriate), we stop our collaboration with them. It is the duty of all of us who work together for this journal to improve it and work correctly – keeping promises, taking others into consideration. We have registered Popular Inquiry in Finland (ISSN 2489-6748).
The articles that are submitted for the journal are, by us editors, submitted for a double-blind peer review procedure. The (also guest) editors of each issue take care that the review process is done properly to ensure that texts get well evaluated, criticized and amended before publication. Editors can always reject submitted articles both before and after the review process, if there are substantial problems in them. Whoever is the editor of an issue, has the authority to suggest revisions to maintain clarity and the appropriate academic level of the journal.
Popular Inquiry is open access. We aim to make knowledge freely available for the public. We don’t even desire to have the copyrights of the articles. They are left fully for the authors, although we’d like the journal to be mentioned when articles are reprinted/reused (and we’d like to be informed too). And, of course, all articles published in the journal, should give the journal the right of first publication. We don’t republish articles, if they are not (of our own choice) classics (we have republished many classic in the journal). We never charge authors for publication nor readers for reading.
All authors have to make clear that the images they send for articles are free for use or that they have gained the copyrights for them. The editors of the issues, in the end, should always check this and be in charge of the process. Images should support argumentation, not beautify the articles or make them ‘look interesting’.
To maintain academic freedom to its fullest, Popular Inquiry has been kept free, not-funded, not connected to any institution (although officially and for logistic reasons published, besides on our own private Webpage, also by the Aalto University library (we call this the archive page)), and totally open-access. Should there be violated copyright holders, please contact the editors of the journal.
We’d like to remind the authors, that we require that they make clear what parts in their texts are references from other texts, following the journal’s bibliographical style sheet. We do not accept plagiarism. Also, we consider submitting the same article to other journals at the same time as it is submitted for Popular Inquiry unethical. On the other hand, we make our best to be fast with the process of reviewing. If an article has been written by more than one author, all authors must have full consensus about the final version of the article. To make sure that this happens is the responsibility of the corresponding author. All authors of an article must have contributed significantly to the research. Authors are also obliged to participate in the peer review process. No royalties or fees are given to authors. All authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes after the article has been published.
If authors have received private financial support for the work or any other type of support that could be meaningful to know before publishing (e.g. funding from an agent that has been mentioned in the text), it must be mentioned. If an author objects to the review of his/her/other manuscript, it is also possible to contact both the editors and the editors-in-chief.
We evaluate manuscripts with the help of reviewers, but also based on our own view on the academic quality of the texts offered. It is not acceptable to use unpublished information, and this applies to both editors of issues and editors-in-chief. (There can of course be consent by the author, and this changes the situation.)
If a submitted manuscript or published article has received ethical or other complaints, it is the duty of the editors to react and organize a meeting with the editors of the journal, so we can have a look at the problem. Editors must take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, and in no case, shall a journal or its editors encourage such misconduct, or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place. If needed, the editors must always be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, and apologies, and if a published article need to be corrected or in severe cases retracted the editors must take action to do so. The editors should aim to use the best possible experts to review the research articles received.
If not invited or republished classics, all research articles have to be subjected to blind, double peer-review, and the journal saves the reviews in its own archive (which the public has no access to, but which can be opened for a check, when needed for a reason or another). Reviewers of Popular Inquiry should treat all manuscripts as confidential documents. They should not be used for research or personal or professional advantage before the official publication. All referees of Popular Inquiry should have absolutely no conflict of interest regarding publications they review. They should aim to be as objective as possible in their evaluations. If suggested reviewers are unable to be this or if they feel academically unable to perform the review as experts in the field, they should excuse themselves, and also if they are unable to write the review promptly. The review should be formulated to be as clear and easy to understand as possible, and with supporting arguments, and it must help the author to improve the manuscript. If a manuscript is rejected, the rejection must always be accompanied with sufficient arguments for the rejection. All the articles that are being reviewed for Popular Inquiry should be treated confidentially. And everyone working for the journal – we are so thankful for your work! – should aim to be polite and constructive, so we get this going well. We are absolutely against all forms of academic bullying or acting like “reviewer 2” (the classical, picky reviewer, who is not constructive).
All those who engage in publishing and editing the journal should always work hard to find and take the steps needed for identifying and preventing the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, immediately when they notice that something like that has happened. In no case must Popular Inquiry or its editors encourage such misconduct, or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place. In the event that Popular Inquiry’s publisher or editors are made aware of any allegation of research misconduct the publisher or editor must deal with allegations appropriately and promptly according to the guidelines for retracting or correcting articles as stated above.
The names and email addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party. This is our policy.
If for some reason Popular Inquiry: The Journal of the Aesthetics of Kitsch, Camp and Mass Culture should cease publication and its main page (www.popularinquiry.com) would cease to exist, its content will be achieved and be still available at the archive page maintained by Aalto University’s Learning Center (https://aaltodoc.aalto.fi/handle/123456789/20611).