Proposals due January 7, 2026 for the Fall 2026 Issue

Proposals are due January 7, 2026. Our editorial advisors will vet proposals in a blind review process, and you will be notified of acceptance or non-acceptance in early February. Articles of 2,000 to 3,000 words maximum, along with high-resolution images, will be due in late March.

Theme: Cutting Through the Noise

In December 2024, Oxford University Press named brain rot its word of the year. Although the group notes that the first recorded use of the phrase occurred in 1854 (in Henry David Thoreau’s Walden no less), it also goes on to note the “new significance” of the term in our chronically online age, defining it as the “supposed deterioration of a person’s mental or intellectual state, especially viewed as a result of overconsumption of material (now particularly online content) considered to be trivial or unchallenging.”[1] And, we might argue, the problem goes beyond trivial matters: never-ending news alerts reduce even the most horrific humanitarian crises, environmental disasters, and urgent political debates to noise. It’s more than enough to make even the most engaged individuals shut down. How can exhibitions compete in such an oversaturated atmosphere? And more importantly, how can they help, allowing visitors space to process, reflect, reconnect, and/or recharge away from the endless chatter? For this issue, we seek to understand how exhibitions can help cut through the noise of our current moment.

[1] “Brain rot,” Oxford Word of the Year, Oxford University Press, accessed October 17, 2025, https://corp.oup.com/word-of-the-year/.

Proposals for this issue might address any of the following topics:

---

• The design of intentional spaces that foster specific visitor outcomes, such as reflection or a call to action, or that encourage visitors to process challenging content
• How to interpret and present hot-button or potentially divisive content in ways that cut through polarizing points of view to reveal facts and nuance
• How to encourage productive dialogue or empathy
• Exhibitions that have explicitly engaged with the current media landscape in thought-provoking and informative ways
• Exhibitions as places of reprieve, connection, or even joy, and, conversely, exhibitions as sites of debate and questioning
• Lessons learned from times when exhibitions themselves have become the focus of online noise—and differentiating between noise and meaningful critique
• Exhibitions as resistance to groupthink, polarization, and division
• Rest (both intellectual and physical) as an intentional interpretive and design strategy
• Low-tech interactive solutions that engage without relying on screens

Proposals can focus on a specific exhibition, provide an overview of exhibitions and practices, or offer an insightful review of current literature and other resources to help elucidate core practices. The exhibitions and/or elements discussed can be created by or for museums of all disciplines, historical sites, galleries, institutions that collect and display living collections, or others. Proposals might come from designers, exhibit developers, interpretive planners, curators, writers, educators, or others who create and contribute to exhibitions at all stages of their careers. In all cases, accepted authors will be expected to write articles that illuminate larger issues. Exhibition descriptions should be critical and analytical, and theoretical research and evaluation findings (even if informal) must be used to support arguments for the strengths and weaknesses of a project.

A Note About AI

Authors are expected to write their own articles, without the use of AI (large language models, ChatGPT, etc.). This includes using AI to edit your submission (beyond Word’s spelling or grammar check features). If authors plan to use AI to assist with data collection or other research functions to facilitate the creation of their articles, this use must be disclosed and properly cited (more detailed information will be provided if your proposal is selected).

Exhibition does not use AI in any of its editorial processes. All submissions will be reviewed by a panel of your peers with many decades of combined experience, who are all committed to creating meaningful content for our field. We believe this human-centered approach results in articles that honor your individual voice while protecting your intellectual property. We welcome first-time authors and ESL authors and will provide additional editorial support as needed.

How to write and submit a proposal

There are two parts to a proposal (which must be submitted as a Word document):

Part 1: Description (400 words max)

The description must:

• Include a proposed title for the article (proposed titles should be brief, interesting, and illuminating).
• Clearly and succinctly convey what the article’s thesis will be.
• Indicate the approaches, strategies, or knowledge that readers will take away from the article.
• Convey how the article would raise questions or illuminate larger issues that are widely applicable (especially if the proposal focuses on a single project).

Please note that accepted articles will be expected to provide critical, candid discussions about issues and challenges, successes and failures, and to provide some level of evaluation and/or theoretical grounding.

Part 2: Brief Bio

Please provide a brief bio (no more than one paragraph) for each author that describes their background and qualifications for writing the article (please do not include resumes or CVs).

Pease end all proposals as Word documents via email to Jeanne Normand Goswami, Editor, Exhibition at: jeanne.goswami@gmail.com. Submissions from colleagues and students around the world are welcomed and encouraged.

Deadlines: Proposals are due January 7, 2026. Our editorial advisors will vet proposals in a blind review process, and you will be notified of acceptance or non-acceptance in early February. Articles of 2,000 to 3,000 words maximum, along with high-resolution images, will be due in late March.

Other ways to contribute

Would you like to contribute to Exhibition but don’t have a project that fits the call? We are looking for volunteers to contribute to the journal as book reviewers and exhibition critique writers.

What we’ll need:

If you are interested in being considered for these opportunities, please let us know:

• Your name, title/role, institution (if applicable), geographic location (so we can match you with exhibitions in your area), and any areas of particular interest or focus (e.g., are you a public history professional, art historian, scientist, or designer? Do you have experience with content development or museum education?).
  
• Whether you are interested in writing book reviews, exhibition critiques, or both (NOTE: Book reviewers will receive a complimentary copy of the chosen book).
  
• If you have a specific idea in mind for either a book review or exhibition critique, please provide a brief (150-word max) description that includes why you think it would make a good addition to this issue (NOTE: you do not need to have a specific idea to be considered).

Please send requested information via email to:

Jeanne Normand Goswami, Editor, Exhibition at: jeanne.goswami@gmail.com. Submissions from colleagues and students around the world are welcomed and encouraged.

Deadlines: All information is due January 7, 2026. Book review and exhibition critique submissions will be considered by our editorial team alongside article proposals in January 2026. If you are selected to contribute to the issue, you will be notified in early February and a draft of your assigned submission (approximately 1,500 words) will be due in late March 2026.

---

Click here to learn more about Exhibition or access the archive of back issues.