Editorial process

Manuscripts are evaluated anonymously (double blind review) primarily with regard to originality of approach and general academic standards. Reviewers are selected from among Polish and international specialists in the relevant field. After an article is accepted for publication (provisionally or bindingly), the author will receive a detailed list of all the amendments suggested by the editors and reviewers. Should an article be rejected, the author will receive a detailed explanation. In any case, the author has the right to explain (in an email correspondence with InterAlia) why s/he disagrees with particular criticisms or suggestions from the the reviewers or the editors.

We do not charge any fees for publishing in InterAlia.


By submitting an article to InterAlia the author declares that s/he follows the general rules of academic integrity. In particular, the author declares that the submitted article is her/his own work, i.e. it does not contain any plagiarized or ghost-written material. When an article is co-authored, the editors require a statement that will specify each person’s individual contribution (in order to avoid the so-called ‘guest authorship’). All offences against academic standards shall be dealt with appropriately.

By submitting an article or other work, the author grants to InterAlia the right to publish that work online in one of the journal’s issues. The author also grants to InterAlia the non-exclusive right to re-publish that work in translation or abridged form or other derivative form in electronic or print publications. The author further consents to having his/her work used under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. Copyright for the content of the texts published in InterAliastays with the authors, whereas copyright for the edited versions stays with InterAlia.

By submitting an article to InterAlia the author agrees to comply with InterAlia‘s policy regarding sexually explicit content. Such content is accepted under the conditions that 1) it is strictly related to the author’s argument and used for analytic rather than illustrative purposes, and 2) its use – if potentially problematic from certain feminist, queer or trans* perspectives – is well justified by the author on academic and ethical grounds.