top of page

Peer-Review Criteria

Architecture Philosophy conducts double-blind reviews of all papers submitted. Each paper is reviewed by one philosopher and one architect. Reviewers are members of the editorial board and are asked to evaluate submissions according to the following criteria:

Appropriateness to the field of architecture philosophy:

  • Does the paper acknowledge and/or build on existing scholarship in both architecture and philosophy?

  • Does the paper acknowledge existing scholarship in philosophy and architecture respectively?


Philosophical analysis:

  • Is philosophy engaged directly?

  • Is there an argument?

  • Is there analysis of the claims made?

  • Is the logic of the argument presented explicitly?

  • Are the paper’s arguments valid and sound?


Architecture analysis:

  • Is architecture engaged directly?

  • Is architecture’s relevant history/contemporary situation acknowledged?

  • Is architecture’s history/contemporary situation dealt with accurately?



  • Is this paper a contribution to knowledge?

  • Does the paper present new ways of solving philosophical problems in architecture (philosophy) or does it engage architecture to illustrate philosophical problems?

  • Does the paper present new ways of engaging architecture and the built environment?



  • Is the paper written in English to general academic writing standards for the humanities?

  • Does the paper follow the journal’s submission guidelines?

bottom of page