Peer Review Guidelines

Thank you for agreeing to review for the Journal of Practice Theory. Your time is greatly appreciated and your expertise is invaluable to ensure that we publish high-quality research that advances the field of practice theory.

We ask that, where possible, you complete your review within four weeks of receiving the manuscript.

Please submit your review by adding your comments in the form, part of the journal's review platform, and by, selecting your recommendation from the drop down list. (While there is an option, there is no requirement to upload any review files.)

Regardless of your recommendation, we ask that you frame your comments in a way that will help the authors develop their work, whether for this journal or another publication.

Once we receive all reviewers’ comments, the assigned editor will make a final decision on the manuscript (reject, major revisions, minor revisions, accept) based on your recommendations. The editor will then communicate the decision to the author, accompanied by anonymised reviewer feedback to guide the development of the manuscript, whether or not it is accepted for publication.

Review Guidelines

When reviewing, please consider the following broad principles:

Constructive Feedback with a Developmental Focus
As a reviewer, your role is to help authors develop their ideas with greater clarity, depth, and relevance to the practice theory community. Constructive criticism should identify any issues in the manuscript, explain why they are problematic, and offer suggestions for improvement. If there are concerns that may not be suitable for direct feedback to the author, please include them in your confidential comments to the editor.

Advancing the Study of Social Practices
The journal seeks to publish work that contributes to the theoretical and methodological development of practice theory. Whether the manuscript is empirical or conceptual in focus, your review should assess how aligned the contribution is to the Aims and Scope of the journal and how effectively it engages with and advances the study of social practices.

Communicating to an Interdisciplinary and International Audience
Our journal intends to serve a diverse readership, including scholars from various disciplines and parts of the world. It is important the written communication is clear, and that ideas and arguments are introduced and accessible to readers with different academic backgrounds. Your review should consider whether the manuscript is written in a way that can be understood and appreciated by an international and interdisciplinary audience.

Review Criteria and Focus Areas

In addition to the broad principles above, your review should address the following criteria, as relevant to the type of contribution you are reviewing:

Theoretical or Practical Relevance: Does the manuscript make a significant contribution to the understanding of social practices?

Originality: Does the work offer new insights, approaches, or positions in the field of practice theory?

Research and Design: How well does the manuscript connect theoretical conceptions and positions with empirical research or cases?

Writing Style and Presentation: Is the manuscript well-organised, clearly written, and appropriately introduced for an interdisciplinary audience?

Ethical Considerations: Are there any ethical issues that need to be addressed in the manuscript before it is published?

Specific Considerations for Different Types of Contributions

Given the range of contributions we publish, we ask that your review take into account the specific focus and format of the manuscript:

Articles: Assess the rigor and depth of the research, the soundness of the methodology and the contribution.

Essays: Focus on the originality of the ideas, the strength of the argument, and the relevance to ongoing debates in practice theory.

Recommendation Options

In addition to your written feedback, we ask that you select one of the following recommendations for the manuscript:

Accept Submission: The manuscript is considered good enough to be published without further revisions. 

Revisions Required: The manuscript needs only minor changes before being accepted. It does not require another round of peer review.

Resubmit for Review: The manuscript needs significant revisions and will require another round of peer review. (In the first instance, we will ask you to review the author(s)’ revision.)

Resubmit Elsewhere: The manuscript does not fit the aims and scope or meet the quality standards of the  journal, but may be suitable for another publication. 

Decline Submission: The manuscript is not considered acceptable for publication. 

See Comments: Use this option if your recommendation does not fit well with the above options.

Contact Information

If you have any questions or concerns at any stage of the review process, please do not hesitate to contact us - jpt@lancaster.ac.uk