Signals are an important part of the JoPP peer review process. They are intended to widen the scope of publishable articles by placing the reputational cost of publishing an imperfect article on authors, rather than on the journal.
Please note:
Positive signal = 1, negative signal = 0, positive/negative signal = 0.5
Only signals marked with a “*” are used to calculate the JoPP Signal.
Objective categories
Activist: 0/2
Academic: 2/2*
Prospective: 0/2
Formalised: 0/2
Language quality: 2/2*
Subjective categories
Scope of debate: 2/2
Comprehensiveness: 0/2*
Logical flow: 2/2*
Originality: 2/2*
Review impact: 1.5/2
Commendations
Reviewers indicate their appreciation of the article in the form of a 50 word statement.
Reviewer A
The article makes a significant contribution to the field of peer production because it situates hacking and making geographically, economically, politically, materially and historically. The five cases are examined in a nuanced manner, and points to diverse framing contingent to each national cultural and socioeconomic context.
Reviewer B
A contribution to Global Hacker Studies presenting an eclectic collection of ethnographic snapshots that the authors propose resonate with the idea of “Making Do” rather than making. While making is associated with Western ideas of empowerment, “Making Do” is about positioning oneself vis-a-vis limitations in a particular way.