Reviewer Guidelines

Authors submitting to Future-Journal of Cultural Studies and Technological Convergence (JCSTC) are expected to adhere to the following guidelines to ensure clarity, rigor, and scholarly impact. Reviews are essential for maintaining the journal's high standards of publication.

1. Review Structure

A typical review of a submitted manuscript will contain four parts:

  • Summary: A concise overview of the paper’s main achievements, capturing the novelty and significance of the research.
  • Evaluation: A balanced assessment of the strengths and weaknesses, addressing the four key criteria: originality, significance, technical soundness, and quality of presentation.
  • Recommendation: A clear and logical recommendation based on the evaluation (Accept, Minor Revision Required, Major Revision Required, Reject).
  • Detailed Comments: In-depth feedback aimed at improving the paper, ensuring it meets the highest standards. Confidential remarks to the Editorial Board may also be provided if necessary.

These reviews are submitted anonymously to the authors, ensuring fairness and transparency.

2. Criteria for Acceptable Papers

Manuscripts for Future - JCSTC must be of the highest quality and fall within the journal’s thematic scope, with a focus on the dynamic intersections between cultural studies, digital humanities, emerging technologies, and related fields. The following four factors are critical:

  • Originality: The paper must present novel ideas, methods, or insights in the context of dynamic intersections between cultural studies, digital humanities, and emerging technologies,. It should contribute to advancing knowledge in the field.
  • Significance and Interest: The research should be of broad relevance to the field of adaptive intelligence and its applications, with implications for both theory and practice.
  • Technical Soundness: The methods, models, and algorithms presented must be scientifically rigorous and demonstrably reliable.
  • Quality of Presentation: The paper should be clearly written, well-organized, and conform to academic standards in terms of language, structure, and citation practices.

Any substandard level in these areas may result in major revisions or rejection.

3. Expectations for Paper Content

An acceptable manuscript should include the following elements:

  • Clear Motivation and Objectives: The paper must clearly state the problem it addresses and the objectives of the research.
  • Demonstration of Novelty: Authors should explicitly highlight what is new or unique in their work and compare it to existing solutions, highlighting improvements.
  • Evidence of Effectiveness: Papers must provide robust empirical evidence, including experimental results, case studies, or theoretical proof, demonstrating the validity and practicality of their findings. Reproducibility and scalability should be addressed where applicable.
  • Scientific Integrity: Every claim made in the paper must be substantiated through strong, logical reasoning and empirical support.

4. Types of Submissions

  • Theoretical or Methodological Papers: These should describe new methodologies, frameworks, or models for dynamic intersections between cultural studies, digital humanities, and emerging technologies. Theoretical contributions must clearly explain how they can impact the development and application of intelligent systems in real-world scenarios.
  • Experimental Papers: Authors must detail the experimental setup, methodology, and interpret the results, emphasizing their practical relevance and how they contribute to advancing the field of adaptive systems.
  • Experience Reports: These are generally not accepted unless they provide deep insights into the practical challenges and opportunities in applying adaptive intelligence technologies, or introduce new, important questions for future research.

5. Comparative Analysis with Related Work

Every paper must clearly demonstrate its relationship to prior work. Authors should carefully position their contributions in the context of existing research, identifying what is novel, and articulating how their results advance or challenge established knowledge.

6. Quality and Precision

  • Conciseness: Authors should avoid unnecessary jargon and overly complex formulations. Definitions should be precise, and concepts should be consistently used throughout the paper.
  • Technical Precision: Concepts should be clearly defined and unambiguous. Authors should avoid multiple references to the same concept with different terms or using terms with multiple meanings unless explicitly clarified.

7. Revisions and Review Process

  • Minor Revisions: Typically reviewed by the associate editor in charge. Authors should submit a cover letter explaining how they have addressed the reviewers' concerns.
  • Major Revisions: Re-reviewed by the original reviewers, ensuring that substantial revisions are implemented. Authors are expected to provide a detailed response to reviewer comments in their cover letter.

8. Confidentiality

All manuscripts under consideration are to be treated as confidential. Authors must not distribute or reference any manuscript without prior permission. Reviewers’ identities will not be disclosed to authors, and communication with authors should be done with discretion.

9. Submission Instructions

Please ensure that your submission adheres to the journal's formatting and submission guidelines, which will be made available on the Future - JCSTC submission portal. If you encounter any issues during the submission process, contact the editorial team at jcstc@fupress.org.