The scholarly content of both versions should be the same. Only identifying information should differ.
Remove Identifying Information
The reviewer-facing manuscript should not display the names, institutional affiliations, email addresses, ORCID iDs, biographical notes, acknowledgements, or other information that directly identifies the author or authors.
Where the manuscript includes a title page, the anonymous version should normally contain the article title and other non-identifying manuscript information only.
- Article title
- Abstract
- Keywords
- Main text
- References
- Non-identifying tables and figures
- Author names
- Affiliations
- Email addresses
- ORCID iDs
- Personal acknowledgements
- Biographical notes
Two Manuscript Versions Required
Every submission to Explorations in Linguistic Review should include two versions of the manuscript: an Anonymous Manuscript and an Identified Manuscript.
- Prepared specifically for anonymous peer review.
- Contains no author names or institutional affiliations.
- Contains no author email addresses or ORCID iDs.
- Temporarily removes acknowledgements or other information that would directly identify the authors.
- Uses neutral forms of self-citation where necessary.
- Contains the full names of all authors.
- Contains complete institutional affiliations.
- Identifies the corresponding author and contact information.
- Includes ORCID iDs where available.
- Includes acknowledgements, funding information, and other relevant author disclosures where applicable.
Authors may use clear filenames such as
Manuscript_Anonymous and
Manuscript_Identified
when preparing files for submission.
Self-Citation and Previous Research
Authors do not need to remove relevant previous research merely because they authored it. Self-citation should be handled in a way that preserves scholarly clarity while avoiding unnecessary disclosure of authorship.
Where possible, refer to earlier work in the same manner in which you would refer to work by another scholar. Avoid formulations that explicitly identify the cited author as the author of the current submission.
- “As argued in Chang (2025), the construction may involve...”
- “A previous analysis proposes that...”
- “In my previous article (Chang 2025), I argued...”
- “Our earlier work demonstrates...”
Relevant references should not normally be removed solely for the purpose of anonymity if doing so would make the manuscript academically incomplete or distort its relationship to the existing literature.
Working Papers, Preprints, and Publicly Circulated Versions
ELR recognises that theoretical research may previously have circulated as a working paper, conference paper, dissertation chapter, preprint, presentation, or other developing scholarly form.
Authors should not make misleading statements about prior circulation. At the same time, the reviewer-facing manuscript should avoid unnecessary language that directly reveals authorship.
Acknowledgements and Funding Statements
Acknowledgements that identify the author, the author's institution, specific colleagues, research groups, workshops, laboratories, supervisors, or other relationships should normally be removed from the version sent for anonymous review.
Funding information that would directly reveal authorship may also be temporarily anonymised where necessary.
Full acknowledgements and appropriate funding statements can be restored after acceptance during production of the final publication.
Document and File Metadata
Author information can remain embedded in Word documents, PDFs, image files, comments, tracked changes, and document properties even after visible names have been deleted from the manuscript.
Before uploading the reviewer-facing file, authors should inspect and remove identifying metadata wherever reasonably possible.
- Remove personal information from Word document properties.
- Accept or remove tracked changes that disclose author or editor names.
- Delete identifying comments.
- Check PDF document properties.
- Check figures, supplementary files, filenames, and embedded metadata.
Figures, Data, and Supplementary Material
Supplementary materials supplied for peer review should be anonymised where they contain information that would directly identify the author. This may include filenames, repository descriptions, README files, scripts, data documentation, figure credits, or internal project labels.
Authors should not remove information that is necessary for reviewers to evaluate the evidence responsibly. Where full anonymisation would damage the scholarly intelligibility of the material, authors may provide a brief explanation to the editorial team.
Institutional and Project References
Descriptions of laboratories, funded projects, fieldwork locations, research groups, courses, institutional repositories, or unique datasets can sometimes reveal authorship even when names have been removed.
Where such information is not essential to evaluation, it may be temporarily generalised in the anonymous manuscript. Where it is essential to interpretation or reproducibility, authors should preserve the necessary scholarly information rather than materially distort the study.
Information in the Submission System
Anonymising the manuscript does not mean withholding author information from the journal.
Authors should provide accurate names, affiliations, email addresses, ORCID iDs where applicable, and other requested metadata through the ELR submission system. These administrative details are separate from the manuscript file supplied to reviewers.
Submission begins at: Submit an Article.
Revised Manuscripts
Anonymous review requirements continue to apply when a revised manuscript is returned for further review.
A response to reviewers should avoid unnecessary author-identifying language if that response will be made available to anonymous reviewers. References to changes can normally be written using neutral formulations such as “the manuscript has been revised” rather than “we have revised our earlier paper”.
Where the editorial office requests a separate non-anonymous document, authors should follow the instructions provided for that stage of the editorial process.
If Identifying Information Is Found
Anonymous review is a procedural safeguard, not a test of whether a reviewer could theoretically infer authorship from research topic, citation history, public presentations, or prior scholarly circulation.
If identifying information is discovered before review begins, the editorial office may request a corrected anonymous file.
If a possible disclosure is identified during review, the editorial team will determine whether the review can continue fairly or whether another step is necessary to protect the integrity of the process.
Anonymous Review Checklist
Before submitting the reviewer-facing manuscript, authors should complete the following check.
ELR Submission Check
Is your manuscript ready for anonymous review?
- Both required files have been prepared: Anonymous Manuscript and Identified Manuscript.
- The Anonymous and Identified versions contain the same scholarly content.
- Author names and affiliations have been removed from the Anonymous Manuscript.
- Email addresses, ORCID iDs, and biographical details are not visible.
- Acknowledgements that reveal identity have been removed temporarily.
- Self-citations are written neutrally and remain academically complete.
- Tracked changes and comments do not reveal author names.
- Word/PDF document properties have been checked.
- Figures and supplementary files have been checked for identifying details.
- Author information has still been supplied accurately in the Janeway submission system.
Questions concerning anonymous preparation may be sent to [email protected] .
Before Submission
Check both manuscript versions before uploading.
The anonymous file must not reveal author identity. The identified file should contain the complete names, affiliations, ORCID iDs where available, acknowledgements, funding information, and other relevant disclosures.