Submissions

Author Guidelines

Please prepare the following items before you start the submission process: 

A. Main file [.pdf]

1. Title
2. Subtitle
3. Author information
4. Author bio
5. Reviewers
6. Funding statement & UiT context 
7. Abstract
8. Keywords
9. Cover image
10. Alternative text for the cover image
11. Creative idea
12. References

Download main file template here

B. Creative Materials (pdf, mp3 or external link)

C. Cover image [png]

D. Optional: Read your abstract aloud, e.g. with the recording device on your mobile phone [mp3]

E. Optional: Documentation of the review process and/or the reasons for the choice of reviewers. If provided, this will be published alongside the contribution. [pdf]

*********************

Quality criteria

The primary criteria for review are creativity, transparency, context, impact, clarity, ethics and accessibility irrespective of the format of the submission. These criteria may be referred to differently across academic practices, disciplines and traditions.  

1. Creativity: Demonstrates creativity (in the sense of innovation and originality) in approach, perspective, methodology, or findings. Makes a distinctive contribution to knowledge that extends current practices in a field. 
2. Transparency: Clearly explains the methods, creative processes, techniques, and materials used, in ways that are place-based and culturally responsive. Septentrio Creative's  AI policy is based on DOAI recommendations. 
3. Context: Acknowledges prior knowledge, situating itself within or challenging existing paradigms. Recognizes its relationship to existing traditions, movements, or influences within or across disciplines.   
4. Impact: Demonstrates potential to advance knowledge, challenge theories, or inspire inquiry and practice. Shows capacity to provoke thought and action, evoke emotion, or challenge perceptions. 
5. Clarity: Readable and attractive for a wide audience. Excessive use of jargon or specialized concepts should be avoided. If such terms are necessary, they must be clearly explained. 
6. Ethics: We advocate respectful freedom of speech and recommend to follow common standards for research ethics.  The journal follows the COPE guidelines on publication ethics. The author(s) maintain full responsibility and accountability for the content. We recommend the following standards for research ethics: https://www.forskningsetikk.no/retningslinjer/
7.  Accessibility: for all audience members, including those with disabilities, by adhering to accessibility best practices. This includes providing alternative text for images, captions or transcripts for videos, and sound files or audio descriptions where appropriate. 

********************

Review process

The role of the reviewers is to help the authors to improve their contribution according to the journal's submission guidelines and quality criteria.

• Author-chosen reviewers: Before submission, at least two peers, invited by the authors, review the contribution.
• Open credit: Reviewers' names, positions, and affiliations are published with the contribution. By being named, they vouch for the work.
• Voluntary documentation: Publishing the review dialogue is welcome but always the authors' choice.
• Editorial check: The editors verify format and that review has taken place.