ISSN 0256-8861 printed version
ISSN 2304-8263 online version

GUIDELINES FOR AUTHORS

• Scope
• Editorial Policy
• Manuscript Preparation Guidelines
• Peer Review

The journal seeks to embrace a wide range of practical and research components, including information and research literacy, information management, children’ literature, ethics, globalization, impact of the digital divide, technology, scholarly communication, open scholarship, indigenous knowledge systems, LIS education, user experience, etc.

Information on the instructions for authors, the types of articles received for publication (i.e. Section Policies), is placed on the SAJLIS Policies' page: http://sajlis.journals.ac.za/pub/about/editorialPolicies#sectionPolicies.

Information on how to format a manuscript, submission preparation checklist and online submission guidelines is placed on the SAJLIS Submissions' page: http://sajlis.journals.ac.za/pub/about/submissions#onlineSubmissions.

The peer review process is handled and recorded via an online editorial system. After a manuscript is submitted via the online system by an author/s, the Editor–in–Chief screens the manuscript and rejects unsuitable or poor–quality manuscripts at this point. Articles deemed appropriate for peer review are sent to 2 – 3 reviewers selected by the Editor–in–Chief from among the LIS and related research communities (nationally and internationally) and could also include members of the Editorial Advisory Board. Reviewers are invited on the basis of expertise in the contents of the manuscript and publication track reecord in the LIS and related disciplines. Following acceptance to perform the review, the reviewers are furnished with a copy of the manuscript and the journal’s peer review guidelines, to which they are asked to adhere. The identity of the authors and their affiliation details are blanked out to ensure a blind review. Reviewers are asked to complete the review within four weeks. Reviewers submit their reports via the online editorial system with a recommendation on the readiness of the paper for publication. The Editor–in–Chief reconciles the review reports and makes a decision on the status of the manuscript accordingly.

Manuscripts may be: accepted (subject to minor or moderate revisions); declined; returned to the authors for revision (to address all reviewer comments in detail, with the possibility of resending for peer review depending on the nature of the reviewer comments); or invited for re–submission altogether. Authors are not made aware of the identity of a reviewer (double–blind approach). Members of the Editorial Advisory Board may be called upon to make additional recommendations.

The Editor–in–Chief has final decision on the acceptance or rejection of all manuscripts. Dedicated reviewers (a selection of five annually) are recognised thorough the award of honoraria.