For authors opting for editorial peer review (rather than double-blind peer review), the process will be single-blind (reviewers will know the identity of the author[s] but the author will not know the reviewers’) or non-blind (both the author[s] and reviewer[s] know each other’s identities). Contributions are reviewed by two editors (for example, volume co-editor[s]) or at least one editor and at least one other expert. (Experts are chosen in the same way as in the double-blind peer-review process outlined above.) The editors work hard to eliminate conflicts of interest in the review process.
The editorial team at the Journal of L.M. Montgomery Studies facilitates review by corresponding with editorial peer reviewers. Occasionally, the editors receive contradicting reviewers’ reports; for editorially reviewed pieces, the collection editor(s) will make a final determination about acceptance and necessary revisions.