Before I wax rhapsodic about how ad hoc peer review is presently working in archaeology on the Internet, it will probably be useful to talk about what peer review is and how it works in the social sciences.
In other words, none of the people involved in the review process is paid by the journal in question, with the sole exception (maybe) of one or more editorial assistants. The author, editor, and reviewers all do this for the prestige involved in the process; they are generally paid by the university or business that employs them, and in many cases, that pay is contingent upon obtaining publication in peer-reviewed journals. The editorial assistance is generally provided in part by the editor's university and in part by the journal.
The reviewers selected to read and comment on the scholar's article are chosen by the editor based on their reputations in the specific field of the article, or whether they are mentioned in the bibliography, or if they are personally known to the editor. Sometimes the author of a manuscript suggests some reviewers. Once a list of reviewers is drawn up, the editor removes the name of the author from the manuscript and forwards a copy to the chosen stout hearts. Then time passes, a lot of time, generally, between two weeks and several months.
When the reviewers have all returned their comments (made directly on the manuscript or in a separate document), the editor makes a preliminary decision about the manuscript. Is it to be accepted as is? (this is very rare.) Is it to be accepted with modifications? (this is typical.) Is it to be rejected? (this last is also fairly rare, depending on the journal.) The editor strips out the identity of the reviewers and sends along the comments and her preliminary decision about the manuscript to the author. If the manuscript was accepted with modifications, it is then up to the author to make changes until the editor is satisfied that the reviewers' reservations are met. Eventually, after several rounds of back and forth, the manuscript is published. The period from submission of a manuscript to publication in an academic journal generally takes anywhere from six months to over a year.
What is Peer Review?
Peer review, at least in intent, is the way the editors of academic journals attempt to keep the quality of articles in their publications high, and assure that poor or fallacious research does not get published. The process is tied up with political and economic issues involving tenure and pay scales, in that an academic who participates in the peer review process (whether as author, editor, or reviewer) gets rewarded for that participation in an increase in reputation which can lead to an increase in pay scales, rather than direct payment for services rendered.In other words, none of the people involved in the review process is paid by the journal in question, with the sole exception (maybe) of one or more editorial assistants. The author, editor, and reviewers all do this for the prestige involved in the process; they are generally paid by the university or business that employs them, and in many cases, that pay is contingent upon obtaining publication in peer-reviewed journals. The editorial assistance is generally provided in part by the editor's university and in part by the journal.
The Review Process
The way academic peer review works (at least in the social sciences), is that a scholar writes an article and submits it to a journal for review. The editor reads it over and finds between three and seven other scholars to review it.The reviewers selected to read and comment on the scholar's article are chosen by the editor based on their reputations in the specific field of the article, or whether they are mentioned in the bibliography, or if they are personally known to the editor. Sometimes the author of a manuscript suggests some reviewers. Once a list of reviewers is drawn up, the editor removes the name of the author from the manuscript and forwards a copy to the chosen stout hearts. Then time passes, a lot of time, generally, between two weeks and several months.
When the reviewers have all returned their comments (made directly on the manuscript or in a separate document), the editor makes a preliminary decision about the manuscript. Is it to be accepted as is? (this is very rare.) Is it to be accepted with modifications? (this is typical.) Is it to be rejected? (this last is also fairly rare, depending on the journal.) The editor strips out the identity of the reviewers and sends along the comments and her preliminary decision about the manuscript to the author. If the manuscript was accepted with modifications, it is then up to the author to make changes until the editor is satisfied that the reviewers' reservations are met. Eventually, after several rounds of back and forth, the manuscript is published. The period from submission of a manuscript to publication in an academic journal generally takes anywhere from six months to over a year.
Comments