Manchester University Press

Peer review procedure

Peer review procedure (short)

All book proposals and manuscripts must first be accepted for consideration by a specialist commissioning editor and then undergo a rigorous process of assessment by anonymous peer review.

Reviewers are chosen by the Press and at least two reports are required for every work commissioned. If the submission is for a series then an additional report from one of the series editors is also necessary. The reports are sent to the author for their comments and feedback. This gives the author a chance to defend or agree with any criticisms or suggestions made, and, if necessary, make revisions to the original submission. At least one further report from an original reviewer is required for a revised submission.

The next stage requires the submission, reviewers, reports and financial forecasts to be considered and accepted by the Editorial and University Board. This Board is made up of senior members of the Press and distinguished academics at the University of Manchester.

At this point a successful submission is contracted for publication subject to satisfaction with the final manuscript. At least one positive report is needed before the final manuscript is put into production.

Peer review procedure (long)

All book proposals and manuscripts must first be accepted for consideration by a specialist commissioning editor and then undergo a rigorous process of assessment by peer review. Reviewers are chosen by the Press and we always aim to ask the best academics in the field to review submissions and a standard template is used for core reviews.

It is our policy to protect the identity of reviewers by making all reports anonymous.

At least two reports are required for every work commissioned. If the submission is for a series then an additional report from one of the series editors is also necessary. If the reports are uncertain or the commissioning editor is unsure of the submission, then more reports may be sought. If the reports are negative, or if the commissioning editor decides not to contract the book, then the submission would be declined for publication at this stage.

The reports are sent to the author for their comments and feedback. This is an important process of the review process as it gives the author a chance to defend or agree with any criticisms or suggestions made, and, if necessary, make revisions to the original submission.

The next stage requires the submission, reviewers, reports and financial forecasts to be considered and accepted by the Editorial and University Board.

This Board is made up of senior members of the Press and distinguished academics at the University of Manchester. This approval confirms the Board’s opinion of the academic quality and financial vialbility of the submission. If the Board declines publishing the work, then it can either be resubmitted with more information by the editor at a future meeting or completely declined for publication.

At this point a successful submission is contracted for publication subject to satisfaction with the final manuscript.

Once the contracted manuscript is submitted it will be sent out to a reviewer for a final report. This usually takes between six and eight weeks, depending on the availability of the reviewer and the length of time it takes them to read the manuscript and write their report.

One positive report is needed at this stage, although if the book is in a series then a report by one of the series editors is also required. Once the report is in, it is forwarded to the author and any changes are discussed with the commissioning editor. If substantial changes are required then the manuscript is likely to be reviewed again once the revisions have been made. If only minor changes are to be made, the manuscript is revised accordingly by the author and then put into production.