• Subjects
• Journals
• Books
• New for 2012

Resources → Authors → Refereeing process

When you submit your paper to a Maney published journal, whether it is commissioned or an unsolicited paper, it will be subject to the peer review process appropriate to each journal.

A rigorous refereeing or peer review process ensures that the articles published in a journal are of a consistently high standard. Maney is committed to rigorous and fair peer review in all its journals. In addition to answering questions about the range and acuity of the scholarship, statistical interpretation, experimental protocols, methods, and conclusions, etc, referees are also asked to summarise their judgement of the paper: does the article make a contribution to the field, is it likely to be cited, and will readers find it interesting, useful or original?

Peer review is managed by the Editor of each journal, assisted by the Editorial Board [click here for a list of editorial board responsibilities on our Editor FAQ page] which should provide help and advice to the Editor, reviewing papers themselves, or recommending the most appropriate experts and referees. There is no doubt that Maney journals, like all others, are dependent on the expertise and time that referees devote to the papers they are asked to review. Authors benefit greatly from the constructive criticism that peer review provides and papers are usually enhanced as a result.

As well as maintaining the quality of the articles published, peer review helps to ensure the integrity and originality of the journal. An expert reviewer may be better placed than the Editor to detect plagiarism and infringements of the rights of third parties. By ensuring that relevant prior work is acknowledged and cited, peer review can help to avoid duplication of effort and clarify the literature.  For more information about publishing ethics please click here.

The integrity of the peer review process is upheld through the discreet use of blind or double blind review. This confidentiality is especially important in subject areas with small communities where most academics will be familiar with each other’s work.

Blind (or masked) peer review means that the identity of the reviewer is not divulged to the author of the article.

Double-blind (or double-masked) peer review means that the identity of the reviewer is concealed from the author, but also that the author’s name and affiliation are concealed from the reviewer. The author is required to remove any information that may identify him or her as the author of the paper.

An alternative procedure, though not one practiced for Maney journals, is open review, where papers are made available for general comment before revision and publication.

Journals that use the Editorial Manager™ (EM) online submission and refereeing system have a questionnaire that referees are required to answer, in addition to space for further comments. Please click here for more information for reviewers of journals that use Editorial Manager™. Each journal’s EM website is configured to the appropriate workflow and offers authors and Editors real-time information on the status of their paper. The implementation of Editorial Manager™has resulted in a significant reduction of the time from submission of a paper to the decision on acceptance. For more information about Maney policy of Publishing Ethics please click here.