Journal Policies

M&M is governed by the following policies:

Copyright and Open Access

M&M is an open access journal, making its articles available free of charge to users. Articles are routinely published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) license. If desired by the author(s), an article may also be published under a more liberal license, e.g. Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0). If necessary, it is also possible that only individual parts of an article are published under a different, more liberal or more restrictive license. If this is the case, these parts are clearly marked as such.

Authors publishing in M&M grant the journal owner, mdwPress (the academic publisher of mdw – University of Music and Performing Arts Vienna), a non-exclusive, transferable, and irrevocable license to use their submitted work under the CC BY-NC 4.0 license (or other applicable license), unlimited in terms of location and time, in particular with regard to the rights of reproduction, distribution, and making available to the public. The right of first publication in all electronic formats is also included. Beyond that, the rights of the authors are not affected. In particular, the authors are free to enter into separate, additional agreements with third parties for the non-exclusive use of any version of the work (e.g. in institutional or subject repositories), with an acknowledgement of its publication by mdwPress.

Any uses by mdwPress or others beyond the limits of the CC BY-NC 4.0 license (or other licenses pertaining to an article or parts thereof) have to be negotiated with the authors of the respective article, unless they are covered by applicable copyright legislation.

Research Ethics and Research Integrity

As a journal publishing research involving groups and individuals in oftentimes vulnerable positions, M&M is specifically committed to avoiding voluntary or involuntary harm inflicted on these groups and individuals in the course of the research or publication process. M&M advocates a broad and reflexive concept of research ethics that encompasses also a decolonial and anti-discriminatory stance on research in the field of music and minorities. In this regard, M&M expressly endorses the Declaration of Ethical Principles and Professional Integrity and the Statement and Activities in View of Decolonization of Music and Dance Studies published by the International Council for Traditional Music and asks its authors to comply with these guidelines of scholarly conduct.

M&M is equally committed to the welfare of the scholarly community as well as of society in general and discourages any breach of professional integrity, such as plagiarism, fabricating data, sabotaging of other researchers’ work, mistreatment of students, or misappropriation/fraudulent acquisition of research funds. M&M refers its authors to the Guidelines for Good Scientific Practice published by the Austrian Agency for Research Integrity as providing guidance on the scope of relevant issues and established standards of conduct.

M&M refuses to publish manuscripts that raise unremovable doubts about the ethical acceptability of the underlying research or that are, if published, likely to cause harm to the groups or individuals discussed in the manuscript. Likewise, the journal will not publish manuscripts that are flawed by breaches of professional integrity. Contributions to M&M may be retracted if breaches of research ethics or professional integrity come to light after publication. Authors publishing in M&M are therefore expected to adhere to the highest ethical standards in all aspects of research and professional conduct.

Authorship, Contributorship, and Artificial Intelligence

Authorship: General Provisions

In line with accepted standards in academic publishing, each author is generally expected to fulfil all of the following requirements:

  1. Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the creation, acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
  2. Drafting the work or reviewing it critically for important intellectual content; AND
  3. Final approval of the version to be published; AND
  4. Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Anyone who fulfils these criteria must be listed as a co-author. Individuals who meet the first criterion should be given a realistic opportunity by the corresponding author to fulfil the remaining three criteria and thereby become co-authors.

Co-authored contributions to M&M should be accompanied by an Authors’ Contribution Statement that describes each co-author’s role in the work.

By default, M&M lists the corresponding author as first author. Any deviations from this rule, as well as the order in which remaining co-authors are listed on the byline, must be decided collectively by the author group.

The corresponding author should provide evidence that all co-authors listed in the byline are aware of and have agreed to the submission. By default, this can be done by including them in email conversations with M&M’s editorship.

Special Provisions for Co-Authorship by Non-Academic Research Partners

M&M encourages co-authorship with non-academic research partners, such as musicians or dancers who belong to a minority discussed in the article, as a way to facilitate dialogic knowledge production in scholarship. Non-academic research partners often fulfil the first criterion, particularly through making a substantial contribution to the creation, acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work. However, fulfilling all of the other criteria may not always be an option for non-academic research partners (due to, for example, linguistic or technological barriers), which would exclude some individuals categorically from attaining co-authorship.

While acknowledgement of non-author contributions would always be an option (see below), the denial of proper co-author status may be deemed an unfair structural devaluation of a non-academic research partner’s crucial contributions to the work. In such cases, exceptions may be made from the general criteria and co-authorship may be credited without complete fulfillment of all four criteria. These exceptions should be clarified and justified in the Authors’ Contribution Statement. Nevertheless, the corresponding author should do everything in their power to involve every mentioned co-author as far as possible in the creation of the manuscript, for example, by discussing the content face-to-face and obtaining oral feedback.

Academic co-authors are always expected to fulfil all four criteria.

Non-Author Contributorship

Any relevant contributions to the work by individuals who do not qualify for authorship should be credited in the Acknowledgments section. These contributions may include, but are not limited to, provision of feedback on the manuscript, creation of translations, digitization of analogue sources, supervision, or project administration.

Artificial Intelligence

Artificial intelligence (AI) is playing an increasingly important role in contemporary scholarship. In recognition of this, and in acknowledgment of both the potentials and problems of AI, M&M is calling for a prudent, critical, ethical, and legal use of AI. The use should particularly respect the cultural, social, and political interests of minority communities or individuals.

Authors must mention in the Acknowledgments section or another suitable part of the manuscript any use of AI in the writing of the text or in the underlying research that goes beyond an assistive role (e.g., language editing). This must include exact information on the tools used and why they were used. Authors are unconditionally accountable for all manuscript content, underlying data, and analyses or interpretations created by or with the help of AI, including full responsibility for potential plagiarisms or fabrications.

Editors, referees, and advisors must not upload unpublished manuscripts, in part or in whole, to generative AI platforms.

Peer Review and Quality Assurance (Summary)

The complete Peer Review and Quality Assurance Procedures are available for download here.

Articles

Article manuscripts submitted to M&M have to pass an initial check by the Editor-in-Chief regarding formal aspects (anonymization, compliance with style sheet, length, completeness of meta-data, etc.), pertinence to the journal’s scope, originality (Has the majority of the manuscript not been published before, at least not in English?), and matters of research ethics and research integrity.

Manuscripts passing this check are in turn sent to peer review. Manuscripts are judged according to the following criteria:

  • Originality: Does the article provide original insights, present new data, develop and/or employ new theories, approaches, or methods?
  • Relevance: Is the article relevant to current discourses in the field of music and minorities research?
  • Quality of research and argument: Is the argument void of any flaws? Are methods or theories explained sufficiently and consistently employed? Is all relevant earlier literature sufficiently acknowledged and discussed?
  • Organisation and presentation: Is the argument of the article clearly structured and easy to follow? Is the material effectively presented and are sources clearly identified?
  • Language: Are language and style appropriate to the subject of the article, bearing in mind that authors might not be native speakers of English?
  • Research ethics and research integrity: Does the research presented in the article raise ethical issues and are these properly addressed? Are there possible breaches of research integrity (e.g., plagiarism)?
  • Other relevant aspects that speak in favor of (or against) a manuscript, if applicable: Does the article provide space for marginalized voices and are these properly acknowledged? Is the research on which the article is based informed by an engaged concern for the interests of the minorities under study? Does the article actively challenge societal power imbalances or stereotypes? Any other aspect the referee considers worth mentioning with regards to its scholarly quality.

Additional criteria or questions may be added to this standard list to ensure the most relevant feedback for submissions to a special collection or for specific individual submissions.

Referees are selected by the editor-in-chief in line with the following principles:

  • Referees have relevant expertise in the field of the manuscript.
  • At least two referees are assigned to a manuscript. The complementary expertise of referees should be adequate to the manuscript’s topic and theoretical/methodical approach. If necessary, additional referees may be assigned to a manuscript.
  • Referees have no conflicts of interest with regard to the author/s (conflicts of interest are constituted by, but are not limited to the following circumstances: co-worker at the same institution; collaborator on a research project or co-authorship/co-editorship within the last three years; former PhD student or PhD supervisor; partner/spouse or any close family relationship, up to the second degree). In addition to pre-screening by the editor-in-chief, experts approached as referees are asked to disclose any potential conflicts of interest (in case they believe to know who the author is) or other likely reasons for not being an appropriate referee (COPE Council 2017:3). The editor-in-chief may in turn decide to select a different referee.
  • Manuscripts submitted to peer review after resubmission (see step 7c) should be reviewed by at least one of the original referees.
  • Members of the editorial board may serve as referees. All referees of a manuscript may be members of the editorial board. If a manuscript is (co-)authored by the editor-in-chief, the review editor, or a member of the editorial board, none of the referees should be members of the editorial board.
  • M&M strives for an overall proportion of female/non-binary referees of at least 50 %. In general, M&M attempts to challenge academic power imbalances by preferentially inviting referees from structurally disadvantaged groups, such as scholars from BIPOC communities.

M&M strives for an overall proportion of female/non-binary referees of at least 50 %. In general, M&M attempts to challenge academic power imbalances by preferentially inviting referees from structurally disadvantaged groups, such as scholars from BIPOC communities.

Referees are asked to observe the Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers issued by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in addition to M&M’s own policies on research ethics and research integrity and will receive guidelines/templates for preparing their report to the editor-in-chief (not made available to the authors) and their comments on the manuscript that will be forwarded also to the authors. The peer review process should ideally be double blind, though exceptions may apply when the anonymity of the author cannot be sustained effectively, e.g., because the research topic is well-known to be connected to a specific scholar. In line with the Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers, referees are asked to disclose potential conflicts of interests that might exist with regards to suspected authors. The editor-in-chief decides in consultation with the referees whether a fair review process can still be guaranteed in such cases. Referees should in all cases remain anonymous. All interactions between referees and authors are mediated by the journal’s editorship. Reviews are not published and are owned by the author of the review.

The editor-in-chief decides on the further treatment of the manuscript based on the referees’ reports and comments. The decision should be informed by the reviews, but the editor-in-chief is not bound by any recommendations of the referees.

After passing peer review and after any required revisions have been made, manuscripts are subjected to a digital check for text identities, e.g., plagiarism. The editor-in-chief reviews the results of the digital check for text identities and decides on the further treatment of the manuscript (clearance for publication, requesting revisions, or rejection).

Reviews

Reviews of books and other media are subject to a two-stage assessment by Review Editor and Editor-in-Chief regarding formal aspects (compliance with style sheet, length, completeness of meta-data, etc.), originality (Has the majority of the manuscript not been published before, at least not in English?), plausibility of content, and matters of research ethics and research integrity.

Contributions to the Section “Forum”

The “Forum” section of the journal provides a space for contributions that do not fall into the established categories of peer-reviewed articles or reviews, but are of lasting value to the field of study covered by the scope of the journal. Although such submissions will not be subject to the standard peer-review process, feedback from at least two advisors should be obtained to enable the editor-in-chief to make an informed decision about whether to publish the contribution or not, and to advise the author(s) on how to improve their submission. The procedure for peer-reviewed articles and the selection criteria apply by analogy. The Editor-in-Chief will ask the advisors questions tailored to the format and content of a particular submission, which may include, but are not limited to, questions from the standard peer-review form.

English Language Editing

Article and review manuscripts accepted for publication will receive English language editing at M&M's expense before being sent to the typesetting and proofreading stage. Authors will receive changes made at any stage of the publishing process for clearance.

Correction and Retraction

In order to ensure the integrity of the scholarly literature, M&M may correct or retract published contributions. M&M follows the guidelines and workflows published by COPE for handling such cases. Notes of retraction/correction or expressions of concern (in cases like pending institutional investigations whose outcome might affect the assessment of a contribution) are always issued by and based on the judgment of the editor-in-chief, in consultation with the editorial board and the review editor. Retractions/corrections may also be requested by members of the editorial board, authors, institutions, readers, or any other interested party. M&M seeks consensus regarding content and wording between the editor-in-chief and the authors of the contribution in question though this may not always be achieved.