Skip Section Navigation

The following sections have been created according to the “Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing,” as published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and related institutions, as shown here: https://publicationethics.org/

Copyright

The author has the sole responsibility to ensure the legally correct application of copyrighted materials in their submissions. The author has financial responsibility for any fees that a holder of copyright materials may charge for the permission to publish these materials. The journal does not establish a contractual relationship with holders of copyright material.

Author Fees

The journal does not charge authors for their submissions. The publication of accepted submissions is free of charge. Each author will receive one free printed copy of the volume that includes their submission.

Financial Statement

Theoria does not pursue any financial interest or profit. Income from sales is managed through the distributors, TAMUpress and UNTpress, and is exclusively used to cover production costs, the labor for printing and distribution, and fees for advertisement. The MHTE Division receives a small fee for each issue to cover postage and advertisement. The publishing institution, the editor, and the advisory board provide their service without any financial compensation.

Statement of Scholarly Ethics, Peer-Review Process, and Academic Misconduct

Theoria is a scholarly journal that conforms with highest professional standards of academic integrity and scholarly ethics. From the article submission, through the peer-review process, to editorial communication in the process of publication, the editor and advisory board are committed to fairness, honesty, and transparency. The selection of submissions for publication is exclusively guided by academic rigor, scholarly quality, correct and appropriate methods of scholarly inquiry as practiced in the academic field of music theory, and appropriate citation.

Any topic that complies with the journal’s topical definition and that meets the standards of professional academic scholarship and ethics will be considered for publication. The journal encourages submission on a wide range of diverse topics, including those related to uncommon subjects and to minority groups and opinions.

Submissions solely represent the opinions, research methods, and conclusions of the author or authors, not of the editor or advisory board. Theoria does not publish anonymous or pseudonymous submissions, except in exceptional circumstances, such as if the author’s safety would be compromised.

Statement on Misconduct

The editor and the advisory board of the journal do not accept academic misconduct. If there is a misconduct allegation, the editor will forward a report to the chair of the MHTE Division at the University of North Texas, who will appoint a group of three scholars to independently investigate the allegation. Based on their report and the recommendation by the Division Chair, the editor will either accept or reject the submission. If accepted, the submission will undergo the regular peer-review process.

Misconduct includes the following:

  • Plagiarism (unmarked and unauthorized use of materials published elsewhere)
  • Use of Artificial Intelligence without stating the method and impact of AI-generated content
  • Use of copyrighted material without consent by the copyright owner
  • Use of content already published online without stating the source
  • Statements that can be understood as a racially, sexually, or politically biased.
  • Falsifying sources or fabricating data
  • Failure from the author to disclose a conflict of interest that influences a submission’s key findings

If the editor discovers compelling evidence for either misconduct or a major error that undermines its key findings after the article is published, they will follow the same process outlined above. Based on the report and recommendation, the editor will promptly publish a retraction that includes a link to the original article and explains the reason for retraction.

The Peer-Review Process

All submissions will be peer reviewed, except for:

  • Book reviews
  • Conference proceedings, if the respective conference papers were subjected to a review process for acceptance by the conference program committee

A submission will first be evaluated by the editor for compliance with the topical areas of the journal and general appropriateness regarding scholarly quality and editorial feasibility. If accepted for further review, the editor will send the submission to two reviewers with relevant expertise. Reviewers and authors must remain anonymous, and the editor will ask a reviewer to reject a review assignment if they can identify the author by topic or wording. Reviewers are usually recruited from the advisory board of the journal. Outside reviewers may be consulted if the topic is outside the board members’ areas of expertise. Each reviewer will receive a set of instructions that outlines the journal’s topic area and standards of publication, reviewer responsibilities regarding professional discourse and maintaining anonymity, the timeline for review, ownership of reviews, and the procedure if the reviewer suspects misconduct.

Each confirmed reviewer will provide a report that includes the general scholarly assessment of the submission, including recommendations for content and editorial improvements. Reviewers should deliver their report within three months after receiving the submission from the editor. The reports will state one of the following decisions:

  1. Accept for publication as is
  2. Accept for publication with minor revisions of content and editorial details
  3. Revise and resubmit for another round of peer reviews
  4. Reject

If reviewers come to different conclusions, the editor will review the reports and make a final decision as to which category the submission will be assigned to. The editor may also decide to consult a third reviewer if the original reports are strongly conflicting. Once a final decision has been made, the editor will communicate the decision to the author. The editor will forward the reports to the author for guidance in the revision process, if applicable. If necessary, the editor will edit the readers’ reports to maintain anonymity. In case of a “revise and resubmit” decision, the resubmission will undergo a second round of peer review. Reports by the reviewers and the final decision by the editor are non-negotiable.

The Editorial Process After Acceptance

After an accepted article has been revised, the author will apply the editorial guidelines stated on the journal’s website (see below). The author will provide a final, and print-ready article—including illustrations, music examples, and graphic material, as applicable—in the formats stated in the editorial guidelines. The editor will then create the layout of the article and run two rounds of proofreading. The author with then receive the finalized version for their final proofreading. This stage allows only for minor corrections, such as printing errors or layout problems. No major revisions or additions to the content are possible at this stage. Corrections will be applied by the editor/editorial assistant to the master file of the journal.

Reactions to Criticism About a Published Article

Theoria encourages a critical perspective on published articles and the engagement in scholarly discourse. If a reader disagrees with an article, they are encouraged to express their criticism by writing a counterstatement. It may take the form of a brief essay or an article-length rebuttal. The counterstatement will be forwarded to the author who has the right and choice to respond. If a counterstatement is substantial and scholarly rigorous the editor may decide to publish it in a subsequent issue of the journal. Doing so requires the agreement of the original author and the author of the counterstatement. The original author also has the right to create a response to the counterstatement. This response will be published along with the counterstatement, if appropriate and if it meets professional and scholarly standards.