Instructions for External Reviewers
In order to become a peer-reviewer for Linguaculture you need to register with our journal and check the box that asks you to request the Reviewer role at the bottom of the registration form.
After registration, please go to your Profile (top right corner of the page) and fill in your 'Reviewing interests' in the 'Roles' tab, as shown below (note that you can also check the other roles - Reader and Author, as they do not exclude each other):
Next, go to the 'Public' tab and send us a bionote (this will only become public if you publish with us and become a Linguaculture author). Make sure that you include all relevant information about your experience, expertise, and credentials.
THE REVIEWING PROCESS
Our journal uses an automated system which allows both the authors and the reviewers to remain completely anonymous throughout the process.
Once the Editors identify a submission suited for your expertise, you will receive an email notification asking you to review the article, a secure link to the submission (you need to log in to the journal website to see it), and some proposed deadlines to send us your review.
If you agree to our review request, the system will present you with a page from which you can download the paper and upload it again with your comments and suggestions, send comments directly to the author (you will remain anonymous) and the Editor, and make a final recommendation (e.g. Accept submission, Needs revisions, etc.) as far as publication is concerned.
Reviewers assess both the language and the quality of submitted papers. Some of the items to be taken into account in their evaluation are listed below:
- general value of the paper (e.g. innovative; valuable contribution; confirms existing knowledge; outside the scope of the journal; etc.)
- title (e.g. accurately reflects content; needs revision)
- abstract (satisfactory; too short; does not characterise the essence of the work; etc.)
- methods (adequate; inaccurately described; inadequate)
- illustrative material (adequate number and quality; needs revisions; inadequate; etc.)
- references (properly compiled; not in conformity with instructions; incomplete: important references missing; etc.)
- language of the paper (excellent; good; must be improved; etc.)
Depending on the number of revisions needed, the peer-review process may extend over several months.
To ensure the anonymity of your recommendations please read these instructions to make sure that the files you send us and the authors and are made anonymous as well.