Peer review

Every research article is read by at least two independent external reviewers under double-anonymous review: reviewers are not told who wrote the paper, and authors are not told who reviewed it.

Who reviews

Reviewers are external to the journal. Editorial Board members manage the review process and take the decision; they do not ordinarily serve as the reviewers of manuscripts they are handling. Where two reports conflict materially, a third reviewer is appointed.

The steps

1. Desk check — scope, standard, and a similarity check. Manuscripts may be declined here without external review.
2. A handling editor is assigned from the Board.
3. Reviewers are invited. Typically five or six invitations are needed to secure two acceptances.
4. Reports are written against a fixed form, within three to four weeks.
5. The handling editor decides: accept, minor revision, major revision, reject.
6. Revision and re-review, usually one or two rounds.

Why the reports use a form

A reviewer asked to write freely can return two lines. The form asks specific questions — is the research question clear, is the evidence sufficient, do the citations say what they are said to say, what must be changed and why — and it cannot be answered in two lines.

Reviewers are not paid

No reviewer receives a fee. On request we issue a certificate of review service naming the journal, which may be entered in an institutional record.