Editorial and Peer Review

Editorial and Peer Review

Items not peer-reviewed undergo editorial review before being accepted by the journal.

Peer-reviewed items undergo both editorial review and double-blind peer review before being accepted.

 

Editorial Peer-Review Policy Statement

The Journal of L.M. Montgomery Studies is a journal of scholarship dedicated to expanding the discourse on Montgomery, her life, and her work in all its diverse forms. The journal publishes a variety of media relevant to L.M. Montgomery studies, including but not limited to peer-reviewed articles.

The Journal of L.M. Montgomery Studies publishes some categories of non-peer-reviewed materials which are submitted for editorial review. Examples would be notices and notes. However, most contributions will be submitted for peer review. For these contributions, the journal adheres to a strict policy of double-blind peer review to ensure best practices in scholarly research and publication. The journal’s peer reviewers play an integral role in maintaining these high standards by reviewing blinded manuscripts and advising the editors on the publication of submitted contributions. The journal’s peer-review process is outlined below.

Initial Manuscript Evaluation

Upon submission, contributors receive an acknowledgement letter. The editors screen all submissions prior to initiating peer review. Contributions rejected at the submission stage do not meet the editorial standards for the type of submission. Contributions that pass through the screening stage then enter the peer-review process.

Peer-Review Process

The journal employs double-blind peer review, in which both the reviewers and the contributors remain anonymous throughout the process. The editors work hard to eliminate conflicts of interest in the peer-review process.

The editorial team at the Journal of L.M. Montgomery Studies facilitates peer review by assisting with anonymizing contributions and corresponding with potential peer reviewers. Once blinded, contributions are shared with two experts within the field. (For academic contributions, this ideally means one Montgomery expert and one expert in another relevant field such as, for example, fan studies or children’s literature; for other content types, this ideally means one Montgomery expert and one media expert, such as a creative writer or visual artist, as relevant). Occasionally, the editors receive contradicting peer reviewers’ reports and need to ask for a third reader.

Submissions from Editorial Board Members

The journal is fortunate to have many of the leading experts in Montgomery studies on its board and so will naturally expect to publish their work. Please note that submissions from the editors and editorial board go through the same editorial and peer-review processes as other submissions.

Peer-Review Reports

Each peer reviewer receives a rubric, which includes assessment of the following:

  • Significance of Subject                   

  • Quality of Research and Arguments               

  • Connection to Conversations in the Field(s)                       

  • Standard of Academic Writing

Peer reviewers also make one of the following recommendations to the editors:

  • Accept as is or with minor revisions

  • Accept with significant revision

  • Reject with the suggestion of resubmitting after major revision

  • Reject

Additionally, peer reviewers are asked to provide significant commentary for contributors and are also provided space to make comments intended solely for the editors. Reviewers are not asked or expected to make any copy-editing comments.

Expected Timeframe

The Journal of L.M. Montgomery Studies attempts to move each submission through the review process within three to four months, including the following:

  • Receipt of Submission

  • Initial Manuscript Evaluation

  • Entering Contribution into the Peer-Review Process

  • Blinding of Contribution

  • Locating of Appropriate Peer Reviewers

  • Peer Review Period

  • Processing of Peer Reviewers’ Reports

  • Editorial Decision

  • Contributor Correspondence

If the editors need to ask for a third reader, the process may be delayed. Additionally, the process may slow down during academic recesses when potential reviewers are away from their offices.

Decision-Making Process

Based upon two or more readers’ reports, the editors are responsible for making the decision regarding acceptance or rejection for each contribution and for communicating this decision to the submitter. At the completion of the peer-review process, each submitter receives a formal letter from the editors that includes notes from the peer reviewers.

There are four possible decisions following editorial/peer review:

  1. Accept with minimal revisions (post peer review)

  2. Accept with substantial or specific revisions (post peer review)

  3. Reject but with possibility of resubmission (this decision could be made post peer review or prior to peer review, just based on editorial review)

  4. Reject (this decision could be made post peer review or this decision could be made prior to peer review, just based on editorial review)

Becoming a Peer Reviewer

If you would like to become a peer reviewer for the Journal of L.M. Montgomery Studies, please contact Dr. Kate Scarth and Dr. Emily Woster at montgomeryjournal@upei.ca and ask to be added to the journal’s peer reviewer database. Please include a list of your current areas of research in the email and attach a current CV. The benefits of becoming a peer reviewer for the Journal of L.M. Montgomery Studies include access to the most current research in the field of L. M. Montgomery studies. The editors are also happy to provide you with a formal letter of recognition that may be used as a part of your tenure and promotion file or your professional portfolio.