All work submitted to Screenworks is checked for plagiarism. The written research statements that we receive are screened by Similarity Check, a service provided by Crossref and powered by iThenticate—Similarity Check provides editors with a user-friendly tool to help detect plagiarism. The Similarity Check service helps Crossref members prevent scholarly and professional plagiarism by providing immediate feedback regarding a manuscript’s similarity to other published academic and general web content.
As members of CrossRef, all our content is assigned Digital Object Identifiers (DOI). This means that all of our references are made available so that citations can be tracked by the publishing community, and the content is added to the Similarity Check anti-plagiarism database.
Peer Review Process
All work submitted to Screenworks undergoes rigorous peer review, based on initial editor screening and evaluation by at least two anonymous referees. Both the statement and practical work are subject to open but anonymous peer review selected from our growing list of academic reviewers representing scholar practitioners working across the field of screen media both in the UK and internationally. Reviewers will have the choice of recommending publication of both work and research statement, acceptance of work with minor rewrites of statement required, invitation to resubmit both in reworked form or of rejecting.
In the case of successful submissions, the reviews are published online alongside the practical work and supporting research statement. The aim is that, through this process, criteria for research will be generated by the community over a period of time – that we will use a dialogic model of criteria generation and research. The process of open reviewing is intended to promote an active, concrete dialogue within the community of screen media scholar practitioners as to how our research is constituted, defined and disseminated.