Peer Review Process

The peer review process for Scottish Studies is outlined below.

1. Upon submission, the work is briefly reviewed by the editor, to ensure that it falls within  the range of subject matter agreed for the journal, and that its scholarly content and  writing are of sufficiently high quality to warrant external review. If the work does not 
meet those criteria, the author is notified of that decision and no further action is taken. 
2. Once a work has passed the ‘desk review’ process, two external peer reviewers are identified and recruited from within appropriate subject area(s). The editor may ask members of the Editorial Advisory Board to suggest suitable reviewers.  
3. Reviewers are asked to respond by a certain date.
4. External review is double-anonymous. 
5. In the event that both reviewers agree that the work should not be published, the submission will be rejected and the author informed. 
6. If either reviewer suggests changes/emendations to the text, such recommendations are sent to the author for a redraft, to be completed by a specified date.  
7. Redrafted articles are sent to the reviewer(s) for a second look. 
8. If the redrafted article is judged fit for publication and the editor agrees, the submission is accepted and the author notified. 
9. After copyediting by the editor, the author sees the final typeset version (what used to be called ‘page proofs’) before publication.