Information & Culture
Information & Culture
SUBSCRIPTIONS / RENEWALS
** SINGLE ISSUES **
Enter the journal volume and issue numbers in the available fields. See Recent Issues tab for journal details.
- ISSN: 2164-8034
TRIANNUAL · 6 x 9 · 128 PAGES/ISSUE · ISSN 2164-8034 E-ISSN 2166-3033 (issue 47:1 and later) · ISSN 1932-4855 E-ISSN 1932-9555 (issues between 41:3 and 46:4) · ISSN 0894-8631 E-ISSN 1534-7591 (issue 41:2 and earlier)
Andrew Dillon, Editor
Information & Culture is an academic journal printed three times a year by the University of Texas Press. It publishes original, high-quality peer-reviewed articles examining the social and cultural influences and impact of information and its associated technologies, broadly construed, on all areas of human endeavor. In keeping with the spirit of information studies, we seek papers emphasizing a human-centered focus that address the role of and reciprocal relationship of information and culture, regardless of time and place.
Volume 57, Issue 2, 2022
Special Issue: Digitizing Borders, Cities, and Landscapes
Winifred R. Poster, Guest Editor
Digitizing Borders, Cities, and Landscapes
by Winifred R. Poster
Who is Watched? Racialization of Surveillance Technologies and Practices in the US-Mexico Borderlands
by Josiah Heyman
Race, Algorithms, and the Work of Border Enforcement
by Juan de Lara
The Everyday of Future-Avoiding: Administering the Data-Driven Smart City
by Leah Horgan
Producing "Enemy Intelligence": Information Infrastructure and the Smart City in Northwest China
by Darren Byler
The Gentrification of the Internet: How to Reclaim Our Digital Freedom, by Jessa Lingel
reviewed by Kimberly Anastacio
Book Wars: The Digital Revolution in Publishing, by John B. Thompson
reviewed by Leah Henrickson
Technology and the Historian: Transformations in the Digital Age, by Adam Crymble
reviewed by Katharina Hering
Volume 57, Issue 1, 2022
Special Issue: Datafication and Cultural Heritage: Critical Perspectives on Exhibition and Collection Practices
Guest Editors: Karin Hansson, Anna Näslund Dahlgren, and Teresa Cerratto Pargman
No Incentives to Interact: A Case Study of Mobile Phone Interactions with Martin Luther King Jr. Memorials in Washington, DC
by Larissa Hugentobler
Curating China's Cultural Revolution (1966-1976): CR/10 as a Warburgian Memory Atlas and Digital Humanities Interface
by Rongqian Ma
Negotiating the Past Online: Holocaust Commemoration between Iran and Israel
by Aya Yadlin
Datafying Museum Visitors: A Research Agenda
by Pille Pruulmann-Vengerfeldt
The Case for a Digital World Heritage Label
by Carl Öhman
Information Activism: A Queer History of Lesbian Media Technologies, by Cait McKinney
reviewed by aems emswiler
The Queer Games Avant-Garde: How LGBTQ Game Makers are Reimagining the Medium of Video Games, by Bonnie Ruberg
reviewed by Daniella Gáti
Women's Activism and New Media in the Arab World, by Ahmed Al-Rawi
reviewed by Walid Ghali
Volume 56, Issue 3, 2021
Cards, Cabinets, and Compression in Early Stock Photography
by Diana Kamin
Making and Debunking Myths about the Old West: A Case Study of Misinformation for Information Scholars
by William Aspray
Open Source Religion: Spiritual Software and the Production and Ownership of Religious Data (1955–2010)
by Andrew Ventimiglia
Structural, Referential, and Normative Information
by Liqian Zhou
"The Little Strangers at Our Gate": Toronto Public Library's Experimentation with the Settlement House Movement, 1910s-1930s
by Elisa Sze
Notes from the Senior Book Review Editor
by James A. Hodges
Ideology and Libraries: California, Diplomacy, and Occupied Japn, 1945–1952, by Michael K. Buckland, with assistance of Masaya Takayama
reviewed by Noah Lenstra
Reckonings: Numerals, Cognition, and History, by Stephen Chrisomalis
reviewed by Andrew Dillon
Volume 56, Issue 2, 2021
Norms and Open Systems in Open Science
by Johanna Cohoon and James Howison
Processing Mad Men: Media Studies, Legitimation, and Archival Description
by Kate Cronin
Leveraging Secrets: Displaced Archives, Information Asymmetries, and Ba'thist Chronophagy in Iraq
by Michael Degerald
Minding the Gap: Creating Meaning from Missing and Anomalous Data
by Ciaran B. Trace and Yan Zhang
Archival Returns: Central Australia and Beyond, Edited by Linda Barwick, Jennifer Green, and Petronella Vaarzon-Morel
reviewed by Monica Galassi
Architects of Memory: Information and Rhetoric in a Networked Archival Age, by Nathan R. Johnson
reviewed by James A. Hodges
The Creativity Code: Art and Innovation in the Age of AI, by Marcus Du Sautoy
reviewed by Jina Hong
The Know Citizen: A History of Privacy in Modern America, by Sara E. Igo
reviewed by Andrea Ringer
Lie Machines: How to Save Democracy from Troll Armies, Deceitful Robots, Junk News Operations, and Political Operatives, by Philip N. Howard
reviewed by Claudia Flores Saviaga
The Information Manifold: Why Computers Can't Solve Algorithmic Bias and Fake News, by Antonio Badia
reviewed by Christina Varda
Volume 56, Issue 1, 2021
Knowledge Organization in the Wild: The Propaedia, Roget's, and the DDC
by Jonathan Furner
Hegel and Knowledge Organization, or Why the Dewey Decimal Classification Is Not Hegelian
by Shachar Freddy Kislev
The Public Interest and the Information Superhighway: The Digital Future Coalition (1996–2002) and the Afterlife of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act
by Bryan Bello and Patricia Aufderheide
What Documents Cannot Do: Revisiting Michael Polanyi and the Tacit Knowledge Dilemma
by C. Sean Burns
The Promise of Artificial Intelligence: Reckoning and Judgement, by Brian Cantwell Smith
reviewed by Elliott Hauser
Cloud Ethics: Algorithms and the Attributes of Ourselves, by Louise Amoore
reviewed by Elliott Hauser
From Russia with Code: Programming Migrations in Post-Soviet Times, edited by Mario Biagioli and Vincent Antonin Lépinay
reviewed by Adam Kriesberg
Digital Data Collection and Information Privacy Law, by Mark Burdon
reviewed by Brandon Butler
Reprogramming the American Dream: From Rural America to Silicon Valley—Making AI Serve Us All, by Keven Scott, with Greg Shaw
reviewed by Christine T. Wolf
The journal welcomes submissions from an array of relevant theoretical and methodological approaches, including but not limited to historical, sociological, psychological, political and educational research that address the interaction of information and culture.
To learn more about our submission standards or submit an article for publication in Information & Culture, visit our submissions page.
Peer Review Process and Publication Ethics
Articles submitted to Information & Culture are initially reviewed by the editors, who determine whether the manuscript will be sent to outside reviewers. If chosen for review, the manuscript is then evaluated in a double-blind process by at least two and usually three outside reviewers, including members of the journal's Editorial Advisory Board, and/or other experts in relevant fields as selected by the editors. This peer review process is designed to ensure that Information & Culture publishes only original, accurate, and timely articles that contribute new knowledge, insights or valuable perspectives to our discipline.
Reviewers play a vital role in ensuring the quality of papers published in the journal.
Questions addressed by reviewers include:
- Is the topic within the scope of the journal?
- Is the topic significant or sufficiently interesting to warrant publication?
- Is the scholarship adequately documented and is relevant literature reviewed?
- Are the research aims and any methodological choices made by author clear and justified?
- Is the article well organized and clearly written?
Reviewers make one of three recommendations: acceptance, acceptance with revision, rejection. Reviewers are asked to include comments explaining the recommendation to provide authors with suitable feedback to improve the article. Our aim is to create a constructive process that benefits the journal and the authors while respecting the time and efforts of all volunteer reviewers.
We understand that the timeliness of decisions and publication is a major concern of authors. The typical manuscript is reviewed by one of the editors and sent out to reviewers within a couple of weeks after submission. Reviewers typically have six weeks to prepare their review (a second round of reviews may be solicited if the initial reviewers disagree). Then a couple of weeks are typically required to reconcile reviewer comments (and identify any significant copyediting issues for papers that were accepted or accepted with slight revisions). Thus, it is quite possible that an author could hear back in less than two months from the time of submission. However, the realities of the peer-review process sometimes extend our timeline. You will receive a response as expeditiously as possible. If you are seeking publication for a tenure packet, please allow for ample review time and let us know this is a consideration. Authors receive the reviewers’ comments and are often asked to revise the manuscript in line with the reviewers’ and/or editor’s suggestions. If the revised article is accepted for publication, the editor then determines the journal issue in which it will appear. Authors can help speed the process by ensuring they follow the submission requirements and, if accepted, addressing the reviewers comments and any copy-editing requirements in a timely fashion.
Self-Archiving and Institutional Repository Policy for Information & Culture
A pre-print is defined as the un-refereed, pre-copyedited, author-version of an article submitted for publication.
A post-print is defined as the version of an article following peer review that contains author revisions but that has not been copyedited by the University of Texas Press journal that will publish the article.
Information & Culture authors retain the right to make pre-print and post-print versions of their article available on their personal website, institutional repository, or not-for-profit server, upon acceptance by the University of Texas Press. Authors are not required to remove pre-print and/or post-print versions after publication.
A pre-print must be accompanied by this notice: "This is an un-refereed, pre-copyedited version of an article submitted for publication in (Journal title, volume, issue number, and year).
A post-print must be accompanied by this notice: "This is a pre-copyedited version of an article accepted for publication in (Journal title, volume, issue number, and year) following peer review. The definitive publisher-authenticated version is available from University of Texas Press."
Allegations of Misconduct
The Editorial office of Information & Culture follows the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) regarding allegations of potential research or publication misconduct. When a credible allegation is made the editorial staff will gather relevant documentation and then give the author(s) an opportunity to respond. The editors may request additional information from the author(s) to help verify the originality and/or the veracity of the work. The editorial staff may also seek advice from relevant experts, including Advisory Board members and The University of Texas Press.
The editorial office will reject submitted work in instances where plagiarized content is found in a manuscript. Any material found to include plagiarize content or fraudulent results post-publication will be retracted, and upon investigation, an expression of concern may be issued.
Readers, reviewers and editors can contact the editors about any suspicions of plagiarism by sending email to the editorial staff.
The final decision on a submitted manuscript is made by the editor(s). This decision is communicated to the corresponding author via email. The decision can be one of the following: accept, accept after minor revisions, reconsider after major revisions; reject and encourage resubmission, and reject. If the author(s) find something in the review materials or in the editors’ decision letter that is unclear or inconsistent, they may contact the editorial office for clarification.
An appeal process has been established to allow authors an opportunity to appeal the editor’s decision only when the latter is affected by factual or procedural errors. Perceived fairness of the decision does not constitute grounds for appeal. Authors appealing the editor’s decision should submit a letter of appeal to the editorial office within 30 days of receiving the decision email. The letter of appeal should describe the errors and provide a detailed demonstration that those errors were material to the editor’s decision.
The author’s appeal is allowed to override earlier decisions by the editors only when new information germane to the original review decision is presented. The author’s protest alone is not sufficient to affect the editors’ decision.
Conflicts of Interest
A conflict of interest occurs when an existing relationship (personal, financial, contractual, political, professional, religious, or otherwise) is perceived to impact the objectivity in presenting, reviewing, or publishing a piece of work. The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) states in its Guidelines on Good Publication Practice (2003) that ‘Conflicts of interest arise when authors, reviewers, or editors have interests that are not fully apparent and that may influence their judgments on what is published. They have been described as those which, when revealed later, would make a reasonable reader feel misled or deceived.’
Conflicts involving reviewers
Reviewers are expected to exclude themselves from evaluating manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest. All information obtained in the reviewing process should be treated as confidential and not used for personal advantage.
Conflicts involving authors
The journal requires all prospective authors to disclose any potential conflict of interest that are direct related to the work submitted for publication and that could impact the objectivity and/or integrity of a publication. Authors must identify and disclose any conflict of interest at the time of submission. If there is no conflict of interest, please state “The author(s) declare no conflict of interest.” For works authored by several scholars, the corresponding author shall review this policy with contributing authors to disclose all conflicts of interest collectively.
If a study was sponsored/funded in its entity or in some part (the design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, manuscript preparation, etc.), the role of the sponsor/funder should be stated as well. If no funding has been received, the author(s) should state “The author(s) declare no financial support for the research reported in this article.”
Failure to disclose conflicts of interest may result in a rejection of a submitted work. If a conflict of interest is discovered after the work has been published, the editor will communicate the incident to the readers by publishing a notice. Anyone who suspects an undisclosed conflict of interest in the work that has been published or is under considered by the journal should contact the editorial staff.
Conflicts involving editors
Submissions authored by the current editors of the journal will be handled by a guest editor who will oversee the review process and the final decision on the manuscript in question.
The list of authors should accurately reflect who contributed to the work presented. All individuals listed as authors should meet the following qualifying criteria:
- contributed substantially to conceptualization, design, data collection, analysis, and/or interpretation of the findings AND
- contributed to drafting or revising of the manuscript AND
- approved the final version of the manuscript for publication AND
- agreed to accept responsibility for all aspects of the work including its accuracy and integrity.
Contributions for those who do not meet the authorship criteria should be attributed in the Acknowledgement section. It is expected that authors include a general acknowledgement where their work has received substantial intellectual and technical help, including in the writing and editing of the manuscript.
Order and disambiguation of names
Any change to the list of authors or its ordering is expected to be agreed upon by all persons involved, including those whose names have been removed from the list. Any changes in authorship should be communicated in the letter to the editor. The editorial office encourages authors to take measures and remove potential ambiguity around personal names by using appropriate tools (e.g.. ORCID) that provide unique digital identifiers.
The corresponding author
The corresponding author is expected to act on behalf of all co-authors and communicate with the editorial office during the review process. It is the corresponding author’s responsibility to ensure that all co-authors have seen and approve of the final version of the manuscript and have agreed to its publication.
Information & Culture is indexed in Academic OneFile, Academic Search Premier, America: History and Life, Arts and Humanities Citation Index, Book Review Index, Historical Abstracts, IBR (International Bibliography of Book Reviews), IBZ (International Bibliography of Periodical Literature), Library and Information Science Abstracts, Library and Information Science Source, Literature Resource Center, MLA International Bibliography, Referativnyi Zhurnal, and Scopus
Full Page: $300.00
Half Page Horizontal: $250.00
Agency Commission: 15%
Full Page: 4.5 x 7.5 in.
Half Page: 4.5 x 3.75 in.
Trim Size: 6 x 9 in.
Halftones: 300 dpi
|Winter||November 15||December 1|
|Spring||February 15||March 1|
|Summer||May 15||June 1|
All advertisements and use of lists are limited to material of scholarly interest to our readers. A sample mailing piece must accompany all list rental orders. If any advertisement or mailing piece is inappropriate, we reserve the right to decline it.
- All copy is subject to editorial approval.
- Publisher's liability for error will not exceed cost of space reserved.
- If requested, all artwork will be returned to advertiser.
- Invoices and tear sheets will be issued shortly after journal publication.
- We prefer to have ads as Portable Document Format (PDF) files.
These files can be e-mailed directly to email@example.com.