Before Preparing a Submission

Authors should first consult the journal's Aims & Scope and determine whether the proposed manuscript makes a substantive contribution to the scholarly conversations addressed by GRHAS. Contributions should present a clearly identifiable research question, argument, interpretation, methodological development, or critical intervention.

The journal welcomes work grounded in particular languages, historical periods, cultural traditions, artistic practices, or social contexts. Authors should explain the relevance of their chosen materials to the wider scholarly question and ensure that claims do not extend beyond the evidence presented.

Manuscripts must not be under simultaneous consideration by another journal. Related preprints, theses, conference contributions, translations, and previously published or overlapping work must be disclosed. All authors must approve the submitted version and the proposed authorship order.

Article Categories and Recommended Lengths

Authors should select the article category that most accurately reflects the purpose, form, and scholarly contribution of their manuscript. The following word ranges are recommendations rather than absolute limits. They apply to the main text and exclude references, figure and table captions, and supplementary materials unless the editor specifies otherwise.

Manuscripts outside the recommended range may be considered when the scope, evidence, or structure of the research justifies the difference. Authors should explain any substantial departure from the stated length in the cover letter.

Invited thematic introductions may also be considered under editorial arrangements associated with special issues. The applicable preparation requirements and submission process should be confirmed with the editorial office.

Manuscript Format and Submission Files

Authors should submit an editable manuscript, preferably in Microsoft Word format (.docx), together with a separate title page and a cover letter. The manuscript should use legible academic formatting, ordinarily with a 12-point font, double spacing, and standard margins, unless specific instructions for the selected contribution type provide otherwise.

Use consistent heading levels, paragraph formatting, quotation conventions, and references. Avoid unnecessary decorative formatting, embedded text boxes that interfere with editing, and complex layouts that prevent straightforward copyediting or conversion to publication files.

Files should be named descriptively according to their role. All electronic submission fields must accurately reproduce the manuscript's title, abstract, keywords, contributor details, and article category.

Title Page and Author Information

The separate title page should contain the complete manuscript title; each author's preferred publication name, institutional affiliation and country, or appropriate independent-scholar identification; the corresponding author's email address; and ORCID identifiers where available.

Authors should also provide an accurate contribution statement, funding information, acknowledgements, and competing-interest declarations. All listed authors must approve the submitted version and agree to the order in which their names will appear.

Individuals who do not qualify for authorship but have made relevant contributions may be acknowledged with their permission. Authorship information must remain consistent across the title page, submission system, editorial correspondence, and final publication files.

Protecting Anonymity During Peer Review

Research manuscripts undergoing double-anonymous review must be prepared without unnecessary author-identifying information. Remove names, affiliations, acknowledgements, personal contact details, and identifying document metadata from the review manuscript.

Authors should also inspect figure captions, supplementary files, repository links, acknowledgements embedded in datasets, and audiovisual metadata. Self-citations should remain academically accurate and should be presented in the same manner as references to other researchers' work.

If essential information about a research site, archive, artistic practice, previous publication, or ethics approval may reveal authorship, authors should inform the handling editor. Necessary identifying details may be supplied privately while preserving the methodological information required for review.

Where deposited research materials are required for evaluation, use an anonymous review link when the repository supports it. The editorial office should receive full identifying information separately. Complete anonymity cannot be guaranteed in circumstances where authorship is already publicly inferable.

Title, Abstract, and Keywords

Titles should clearly communicate the central subject, research problem, or conceptual focus of the contribution. Avoid unnecessary abbreviations, promotional language, or claims that extend beyond the analysis presented.

Research submissions should ordinarily contain an abstract of 150–250 words and 4–6 keywords. The abstract should identify the research question, relevant context, materials or analytical approach, principal argument or findings, and scholarly contribution.

For Perspectives & Commentaries and Book Reviews where an abstract is requested, it should not exceed 150 words. For other shorter scholarly formats, authors should follow any category-specific instructions provided by the editorial office.

Abstracts should be intelligible independently of the main text. Avoid undefined abbreviations, unsupported claims, unexplained specialised terminology, and references that require readers to consult the article before understanding its central contribution.

Keywords should identify the primary subject, concepts, analytical orientation, and relevant disciplinary, geographical, or historical contexts. Choose precise terms that support scholarly discovery. The abstract and keywords entered in the submission system must correspond to those in the manuscript.

Manuscript Organisation and Argumentation

GRHAS recognises that appropriate manuscript structures differ among historical, philosophical, interpretive, empirical, computational, and practice-based studies. Authors are not required to adopt an identical section structure across all research types. Nevertheless, every research manuscript should demonstrate a coherent relationship among its question, scholarly context, evidence, analytical approach, and conclusions.

The introduction should identify the research problem, establish its significance, and situate the argument within relevant scholarship. Subsequent sections should present the conceptual framework, sources, research procedures, and analysis as appropriate to the contribution.

Empirical studies should explain their research setting, data sources, sampling or recruitment where relevant, analytical procedures, and ethical safeguards. Interpretive studies should identify the textual, historical, visual, or other material under examination and explain the analytical procedures and relevant contextual limitations.

Theoretical work should define its principal concepts, clarify the relationship between competing arguments or intellectual traditions, and develop its reasoning systematically. Case-based research should justify the selection of cases and avoid generalising beyond the available evidence.

Practice-based arts scholarship should explain the research problem, creative process, relevant artistic materials, methods of documentation, and contribution to scholarly understanding.

Conclusions should explain what the analysis establishes, how it contributes to existing scholarship, and what limitations affect its interpretation. Claims concerning policy, social implications, cultural significance, or future research should remain proportionate to the evidence.

Academic Language and Presentation

Manuscripts must be written in clear, professional academic English. Authors should use a consistent spelling convention, define specialised terminology, and explain unfamiliar abbreviations at first use. Language should be precise, appropriately qualified, and suitable for an interdisciplinary scholarly readership.

Avoid discriminatory or unnecessarily exclusionary language. When discussing historical classifications, contested concepts, or sensitive cultural terminology, explain the terms in their relevant intellectual and social context.

Distinguish clearly among direct quotations, documented observations, participant perspectives, author interpretations, theoretical inferences, and speculative propositions. Limitations and uncertainty should be acknowledged wherever they materially affect the argument.

Documentation of Humanities, Arts, and Cultural Sources

Authors should provide sufficient information for readers to identify the textual, archival, historical, artistic, or cultural materials on which their analysis depends. Source descriptions may require information about the author or creator, edition, translation, date, collection, catalogue identifier, holding institution, performance, or digital version examined.

Quotations must be verified against their sources and accompanied by appropriate location information, such as page numbers, manuscript folios, line references, timestamps, or archival identifiers. Authors should distinguish verbatim quotation from paraphrase and accurately represent the source's meaning and context.

Research crossing linguistic traditions should identify the editions and translations used. Where authors translate source passages themselves, the translation should be attributed accordingly. Translation choices that materially affect an interpretation should be explained, and original-language material may be included when necessary for scholarly evaluation.

For interviews, ethnographic observation, and community-based research, explain how materials were obtained, documented, interpreted, and protected. For restricted archives or culturally sensitive records, identify relevant access and reproduction conditions without disclosing protected information.

Research involving visual art, music, theatre, film, exhibitions, or digital performance should identify the relevant work and version as precisely as possible. Where interpretation depends on a particular recording, performance, edition, or presentation context, that information should form part of the scholarly documentation.

References, Citations, and Scholarly Attribution

Authors should use an established scholarly citation style appropriate to their discipline and apply it consistently throughout the manuscript. Recognised systems include APA, Chicago, and MLA. Any citation-style requirements specified for the selected article category or in the submission checklist should also be followed.

Each citation should correspond to an accurate bibliographic reference or sufficiently complete source note. Authors must verify author names, publication titles, dates, page ranges, editions, publishers, and other identifying details. References must support the claims for which they are cited.

Provide DOI links and persistent repository identifiers where available. Research datasets, analytical software, archival collections, translations, creative works, and other identifiable scholarly materials should be cited in a manner appropriate to their format.

For online materials liable to change, identify the version and access date where relevant. Authors should verify all references independently and must not submit fabricated, inaccurate, or unverified citations generated by automated systems or AI tools.

Figures, Tables, Audiovisual Materials, and Supplementary Files

Figures and tables should be numbered consecutively in the order of their first appearance and referenced in the manuscript text. Captions should identify the content clearly, explain relevant abbreviations, and include source information or credit lines when required.

Tables should ordinarily be editable, with numerical values and labels presented accurately. Images must remain legible at publication size. Authors may be asked to provide original or higher-quality files during production.

Authors are responsible for determining whether permission is required to reproduce third-party figures, photographs, artistic works, recordings, substantial quotations, or other protected materials. Permissions must be compatible with the intended online publication and clearly identify any restrictions on subsequent reuse.

Supplementary datasets, audio, video, images, research code, methodological records, or artistic documentation should be submitted with descriptive filenames and a concise explanation of their relevance. Each supplementary file should be cited or referenced in the manuscript as appropriate.

Authors must obtain appropriate consent for identifiable individuals and remove unnecessary personal information from published or review materials. The article's Creative Commons licence does not automatically override rights held by third-party creators.

Research Ethics and Required Declarations

Authors must supply the declarations relevant to the nature and circumstances of their research. These include author contributions, funding and the role of funders, financial and non-financial competing interests, applicable ethics approval or exemption, consent arrangements, data or source availability, permissions, and substantive use of generative AI.

An explicit statement is required when no external funding or relevant competing interests exist. Ethical approvals or exemptions must not be claimed unless accurately supported by the research circumstances and applicable institutional or regulatory arrangements.

Research involving human participants should explain relevant ethical oversight, informed consent, confidentiality, and privacy safeguards. Where identifiable quotations, images, recordings, or personal details are included, authors must establish an appropriate basis for their publication.

Authors should provide a Data or Source Availability Statement identifying the principal research materials, relevant repository or archival references, and applicable access conditions. Where public sharing is restricted, explain the reason accurately. Studies generating no new dataset should state this where applicable.

Substantive AI assistance should be disclosed by identifying the system or tool, its purpose, the activities affected, and the authors' verification of relevant outputs. AI cannot be credited as an author. When AI is part of the research method, the procedures and limitations should be sufficiently described for scholarly assessment.

Complete declarations must appear in the final publication files. During double-anonymous review, identifying declarations should be provided separately to the editor. Confidential participant records, private consent documents, and sensitive materials should not be included in public supplements or anonymous review files.

Detailed requirements are provided in the Publication Ethics Requirements, Data Policy, and AI & Research Integrity Policy.

Originality, Prior Dissemination, and the Cover Letter

Submissions should present original scholarly work and must not be under consideration by another journal. Authors should disclose the relationship between the manuscript and any relevant preprint, thesis, dissertation, working paper, conference presentation, translation, earlier publication, or substantially overlapping manuscript.

Where existing materials or previously published arguments are reused, authors should identify them accurately and explain the distinct scholarly contribution of the new work. Prior dissemination does not automatically exclude a submission, but disclosure is necessary for editorial assessment of originality and publication rights.

The cover letter should state the manuscript title and article category, explain its principal contribution, describe its fit with GRHAS, and identify matters requiring editorial attention. These may include substantive overlap, ethical issues, permissions, funding constraints, or documented conflicts involving potential reviewers.

All authors must approve the submission and agree to the corresponding author's coordination of editorial correspondence.

Editorial Assessment, Peer Review, and Revision

All submissions undergo editorial screening for relevance, scholarly quality, completeness, and compliance with publication requirements. Research articles considered suitable for external assessment proceed to double-anonymous peer review by independent specialists.

Book Reviews, Interviews & Dialogues, Perspectives & Commentaries, Conference Reports & Exchanges, and invited thematic introductions ordinarily receive editorial assessment appropriate to their format. Additional external review may be requested where a contribution contains substantial original research or requires specialist evaluation.

Editorial decisions may include acceptance, a request for minor or major revisions, or rejection. Where revisions are required, authors must submit an updated manuscript and a point-by-point response identifying how the editor's and reviewers' substantive concerns have been addressed.

Responses should refer to relevant manuscript sections or pages and provide reasoned explanations where recommendations have not been adopted. Authors may disagree with reviewers when the disagreement is supported by appropriate evidence and scholarly reasoning.

Revised materials should be submitted through the existing manuscript record. Authors requiring additional time should request an extension before the revision deadline. Further external review may be arranged when necessary, and an invitation to revise does not guarantee acceptance.

The Peer Review Process explains the journal's evaluation procedures and editorial decision-making responsibilities.

Final Acceptance, Proofs, and Publication

After formal acceptance, authors must provide final editable files, complete author details, accurate declarations, required permissions, and publication-quality figures or other materials requested by the production team.

Authors should examine proofs carefully and verify quotations, citations, references, figures, captions, affiliations, acknowledgements, DOI information where available, and applicable rights statements. Proof corrections should primarily address errors and production issues. Substantive changes to the argument, methods, evidence, conclusions, or authorship require editorial approval.

GRHAS publishes on a bimonthly schedule, with six issues per year. The placement of accepted manuscripts in individual issues depends on the journal's editorial and production arrangements. Acceptance does not, by itself, guarantee publication in a particular issue.

Article Processing Charges and Financial Support

The standard Article Processing Charge (APC) for eligible research publishing categories is USD 450 per accepted article, effective from 1 May 2026. These categories are Original Articles, Theoretical Explorations, Case Studies, Methods & Tools, and Art Practices & Reflections.

Perspectives & Commentaries, Book Reviews, Interviews & Dialogues, Conference Reports & Exchanges, and invited thematic introductions are exempt from the standard APC under the journal's published fee arrangements. Authors should consult the current fee schedule for applicable exemptions and any transitional provisions.

The applicable APC is charged only after formal acceptance. Authors requiring full or partial financial assistance should request a waiver at the time of initial submission. Payment arrangements and waiver decisions are administered separately from the scholarly evaluation of manuscripts.

See the APC Policy Schedule and Waiver Policy for the full applicable conditions.

Copyright, Open Access, and Author Rights

GRHAS publishes articles under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), subject to separately identified third-party rights. Authors retain copyright in their original contributions and grant the journal the non-exclusive right of first publication.

Authors may deposit preprints, accepted manuscripts, and the published Version of Record without a journal-imposed embargo, subject to applicable rights and permissions. Deposited versions should be identified clearly and linked to the official publication record once available.

Detailed provisions are available in the Open Access Policy and Copyright & Licensing Policy.

Final Submission Checklist

Incomplete submissions may be returned for correction before editorial assessment. Providing the requested files and declarations does not guarantee that a manuscript will be accepted for peer review or publication.