Focus and Scope

Public History Review, an international peer reviewed journal, is concerned with nature and forms of public history: with ideas as to what constitutes the ‘public’ in history making, with the means by which history is communicated to a range of audiences and with the ways in which the past operates in the present. The journal provides a forum for historians working heritage, museums, government departments, the media, schools, as freelances and in other areas of the culture to pursue issues and reflect on practice, comment on historical representations or extend our knowledge of public history as a field of study. Contributions from others such as archaeologists, conservation and landscape architects and curators on history-related matters are also encouraged. The journal also aims to engage academic historians more fully with the concerns of the public and public history work. It also seeks to articulate creative tensions between theory and practice.

We welcome reviewers! If you would like to review works for Public History Review please email the Journal Editor to state your interest.



Section Policies


Unchecked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process


All articles submitted to Public History Review are reviewed by two independent peer referees who are qualified experts in the subject field. Authors and reviewers remain anonymous. Reviewers' recommendations are taken into consideration by the editors in determining publication and revisions.

For further information on best practice peer review processes, please see the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors and Publishers and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Responsibilities in the Submission and Peer Review Process.

Conflicts of Interest

Our editors are required to declare any potential competing interests in undertaking their editorial duties. In cases where a manuscript is submitted by a colleague at their own institution or from their resesarch networks, editors will remove themselves from the decision-making process. A co-editor, or an external trusted expert, with no such connections, is then asked to act as the editor for that particular article. Additionally, an editor will have no input or influence on the peer review process or publication decision for an article they have authored and submitted to the journal. Should a member of a journal's editorial team submit a manuscript to the journal, a co-editor, or external trusted expert, will be assigned to manage the entire review process and act as editor for that particular article. If the article proceeds to publication, it will be explicitly stated on the article that the editor who submitted the paper has had no involvement with the journal's handling of this particular article, along with the reasons for this, and the name of the assigned editor.



Publication Frequency

Public History Review publishes at least one volume per year. Journal items are published collectively, as part of an issue with its own table of contents. Special issues of the journal are also published. These are compiled by guest editors by arrangement.


Open Access Policy

This journal provides open access to all of it content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. Such access is associated with increased readership and increased citation of an author's work. For more information on this approach, see the Public Knowledge Project, which has designed this system to improve the scholarly and public quality of research, and which freely distributes the journal system as well as other software to support the open access publishing of scholarly resources.



The CLOCKSS system and the PORTICO system have permission to ingest, preserve, and serve this Archival Unit.



Public History Review has a mandate to publish a broad range of work in the diverse field of public history by authors in different career stages.




The views expressed in this journal are those of the authors and do not, and should not, be considered representative of Public History Review or UTS ePRESS or the University of Technology, Sydney.



Author Responsibilities


It is the responsibility of the author/s to ensure:

- Any conflicting or competing interest is disclosed on submission of their work and all sources of funding are declared.

- They contact the Journal Manager to identify and correct any material errors upon discovery, whether prior or subsequent to publication of their work.

- The work is original, and all sources are accurately cited, according to the Journal's style guide.

- The authorship of the work is accurately reflected. This means that all individuals credited as authors legitimately participated in the authorship of the work, and all those who participated are credited and have given consent for publication. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution or interpretation of the work. Other contributors should be mentioned in the acknowledgement section of the article and their contribution described. Please refer to the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) authorship guidelines for more information on authorship.



Handling of Suspected Misconduct

Issues of suspected misconduct will be handled in accordance with the guidelines set out by the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors.


Corrections and Retractions

Corrections and retractions will be treated in accordance with the guidelines set out by the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors.


Complaints Handling

Complaints related to Public History Review should be directed in the first instance to the Journal Manager, Complaints will be investigated according to recommendations by the Committee on Publication Ethics (see COPE Flowcharts). If complainants are unsatisfied with the response they may contact the Publisher, Authors with complaints related to the peer review or editorial process should refer to the Author Guidelines.