The University of Wales Press

Peer review procedure

Text below extracted from UWP’s Commissioning Procedures. Full document available on our website, linked from: https://www.uwp.co.uk/publish-with-us/ ———————

It is during the Commissioning stage that proposals and manuscripts are peer reviewed. The peer review process is central to academic publishing, testing the validity and soundness of scholarship and thus maintains high standards for academic publication. Rigorous and stringent peer review (together with other functions which form the academic publishing process, such as high editorial and production values, and marketing and worldwide distribution) add value to scholarly work, thus providing it with a clear mark of quality as is appropriate for its intended market.

Assessment of Proposal

If it is decided that a proposal should be submitted for peer review, the author/Series Editors are contacted and informed. The identity of the reader is not revealed in order to ensure that the report is objective and fair. An “arm’s length” approach is taken to ensure fairness and lack of bias: for example, a proposal will not be sent to a reader in the same university as the proposed author.

A peer review is commissioned from a respected authority in the given subject area. The reader is asked to provide a report based on the following questions:

  • Does the proposal have an intellectual coherence and is the balance between chapters reasonable?
  • Are there any gaps in the proposed coverage?
  • Does the proposal break new ground?
  • Are there any competing texts?
  • Is the proposal suitable for publication by a university press?
  • Any thoughts you may have about the market for such a book?

The reader is then requested to make a clear and unequivocal recommendation about the proposal:

  • I strongly recommend publication of this proposal by UWP.
  • I believe this proposal should be published following incorporation of amendments/subject to further consideration.
  • I do not believe this proposal should be published by UWP.

If the proposal is not recommended for publication, the proposal is rejected. The Commissioning Department contacts the author with a copy of the review with reasons why is has been rejected.

If the proposal is recommended for publication, the report is sent to the author who is informed that formal approval will be sought to publish the title from UWP’s Executive.

If the proposal is recommended for publication subject to the incorporation of amendments/subject to further consideration, a copy of the report is sent to the author who is asked if he/she is willing/able to make the proposed changes; if so, the author is requested to respond to the report and set out clearly what revisions will be made and how they will be made and incorporated. The author’s response is then sent to the reader who is asked if he/she can make an unequivocal recommendation to publish, based on the author’s response. If so, the reader is then informed that formal approval will be sought to publish the title from UWP’s Executive. If not, the proposal is withdrawn at this stage.

Submission of Manuscript

The manuscript is sent to the reader who reported on the Proposal for a report on manuscript. The manuscript also undergoes an Editorial Review to ensure that the manuscript is in house style; if the manuscript fundamentally differs from house style, the author will be requested to make the necessary adjustments prior to the final version being submitted. The author is requested at this stage to supply written confirmation of any permissions required to reproduce images/textual extracts in the book.

The reader is asked to provide a report based on the following questions:

  • Does the manuscript have an intellectual coherence and is the balance between chapters reasonable?
  • Are there any gaps in the coverage?
  • Does the manuscript break new ground?
  • Are there any competing texts?
  • Is the manuscript suitable for publication by a university press?
  • Any thoughts you may have about the market for such a book?

The reader is then requested to make a clear and unequivocal recommendation about the proposal:

  • I strongly recommend publication of this manuscript by UWP.
  • I believe this manuscript should be published following incorporation of amendments/subject to further consideration.
  • I do not believe this manuscript should be published by UWP.

If recommended for publication, the author is sent a copy of the report and requested to make final checks to the manuscript. prior to submitting it. On receipt, the manuscript is checked to ensure that it meets with the contract specifications as regards extent, number of illustrations, permissions etc. It is re-budgeted to finalise the price, format and print run If recommended for publication following incorporation of amendments/subject to further consideration, the author is sent a copy of the report and asked if they are willing/able to incorporate the reader’s suggestions. If the author responds positively, the revised manuscript is re-submitted to the reader with a request to re-assess the manuscript and make a recommendation as set out above If the manuscript is not recommended for publication, the author will be formally advised of this and sent a copy of the reader’s report. The matter will then be reported to the Press Advisory Board to be discussed and minuted