Part of
1. Applications for publication of a journal title or series are reviewed by our Editorial Board and may be sent out for additional, external peer review. We may also request further details or clarification from the applicant.
2. When the Editorial Board has received sufficient information, it will make the final decision and the applicant will be informed accordingly.
3. Peer reviewing arrangements for individual journal articles and working papers are the responsibility of the editors concerned. The editorial teams of our journals and series are required to have a robust peer review process in place for the articles and papers submitted to them, and all such submissions must go through this process.
1. Submissions of books or other monographs are initially reviewed by our Monograph Commissioning Panel and (in some cases) selected members of our Editorial Board. We may also request further details or clarification from the submitting author or editor.
2. If the Panel’s initial review of the monograph is favourable, and the monograph meets the Panel’s criteria, it is sent out for formal peer review. Three review reports are sought per monograph, and the submitting author or editor may suggest reviewers to approach, although the Panel reserves the right to approach any potential reviewers that it may choose.
3. All our monograph publications are peer reviewed by academic staff with appropriate disciplinary specialisms, who have been chosen by the Panel. If previous peer reviews exist for a submitted monograph, we would be interested to see them, but our decision on whether or not to publish the monograph would be made on the basis of our own peer reviewers’ recommendations, not those of previous reviewers.
4. For each monograph, the Panel may seek one reviewer from the same higher education institution as the submitting author or editor if it chooses to do so, provided that no conflicts of interest are apparent and that the other reviewers are from different institutions.
5. The identity of the reviewers chosen is never disclosed to the submitting author or editor, but the reviewers are made aware of the identity of the submitting author or editor (single blind peer review).
6. The peer review process can take several months to complete, and exact publication timescales are impossible to predict until the end of the peer review process is reached.
7. When all review reports have been received by the Panel, they are carefully read by Panel members, who discuss the reviewers’ comments between themselves and add their own comments where appropriate. Depending on the reviewers’ recommendations and the Monograph Summary Form submitted with the manuscript, the Panel may then agree on its own recommendation regarding whether or not to publish the monograph. Alternatively, the Panel may ask the submitting author or editor to address the reviewers’ suggestions for revisions first, and to provide the Panel with a list of responses to these, before the Panel’s recommendation is made.
8. If one of the three reviewers fails to submit a review report, the Panel may make a recommendation based on the remaining two reports.
9. An agreement is reached when a majority of Panel members have expressed the same recommendation.
10. Once a recommendation has been made by the Panel, this is approved by the Editorial Board before the monograph is formally declined or accepted for publication and the submitting author or editor is informed. Following acceptance of the monograph, the submitting author or editor must complete any revisions to the manuscript that have been agreed before it proceeds to copyediting.
1. Mae’r holl geisiadau ar gyfer cyhoeddi cyfres neu deitl cyfnodolyn yn cael eu hadolygu gan ein Bwrdd Golygyddol ac mae’n bosib y byddant yn cael eu hanfon yn allanol i gael adolygiad ychwanegol gan gymheiriaid. Gallwn hefyd ofyn am ragor o fanylion neu eglurhad gan yr ymgeisydd.
2. Pan fo’r Bwrdd Golygyddol wedi cael digon o wybodaeth, bydd yn dod i benderfyniad terfynol a rhoddir gwybod i’r ymgeisydd.
3. Y golygyddion dan sylw sy'n gyfrifol am drefniadau adolygu gan gymheiriaid ar gyfer erthyglau unigol a phapurau gweithio. Mae gofyn i dimau golygyddol ein cyfnodolion a’n cyfresi fod â phroses adolygu gan gymheiriaid gadarn ar waith ar gyfer yr erthyglau a’r papurau a gyflwynir iddynt, ac mae’n rhaid i bob cyflwyniad o’r fath fynd drwy’r broses hon.
1. Caiff cyflwyniadau o lyfrau neu fonograffau eraill eu hadolygu’n gyntaf gan ein Panel Comisiynu Monograffau ac (mewn rhai achosion) aelodau dethol o’n Bwrdd Golygyddol. Mae’n bosib y byddwn hefyd yn gofyn am fanylion pellach neu eglurhad gan yr awdur neu’r golygydd sy’n cyflwyno.
2. Os yw adolygiad cychwynnol y Panel o’r monograff yn ffafriol, a bod y monograff yn bodloni meini prawf y Panel, caiff ei anfon i gael adolygiad ffurfiol gan gymheiriaid. Ceisir tri adroddiad adolygu i bob monograff, a gall yr awdur neu’r golygydd sy’n cyflwyno gynnig adolygwyr, ond mae’r Panel yn cadw’r hawl i ofyn i unrhyw adolygydd o’i ddewis.
3. Cynhelir adolygiadau gan gymheiriaid ar gyfer ein holl gyhoeddiadau monograff gan staff academaidd sydd ag arbenigaeth briodol yn y ddisgyblaeth, a ddewiswyd gan y Panel. Os oes adolygiadau blaenorol gan gymheiriaid yn bodoli ar gyfer monograff a gyflwynir, bydd gennym ddiddordeb i’w gweld, ond bydd ein penderfyniad o ran cyhoeddi’r monograff ai peidio’n seiliedig ar argymhellion ein hadolygwyr cymheiriaid ni, ac nid adolygwyr blaenorol.
4. Ar gyfer pob monograff, gall y Panel ofyn i un adolygydd o’r un sefydliad addysg uwch â’r awdur neu’r golygydd sy’n cyflwyno os yw’n dewis gwneud hynny, os nad oes gwrthdaro buddiannau amlwg a bod yr adolygwyr eraill o sefydliadau gwahanol.
5. Ni chaiff yr awdur neu’r golygydd sy’n cyflwyno wybod pwy yw’r adolygwyr a ddewisir, ond caiff yr adolygwyr wybod pwy yw’r awdur neu’r golygydd sy’n cyflwyno (adolygiad sengl dall gan gymheiriaid).
6. Gall y broses adolygu gan gymheiriaid gymryd rai misoedd i’w chwblhau, ac mae’n anodd rhagweld amserlenni cyhoeddi tan ddiwedd y broses adolygu gan gymheiriaid.
7. Pan fo’r Panel wedi derbyn yr holl adroddiadau adolygu, cânt eu darllen yn ofalus gan aelodau’r Panel, sy’n trafod sylwadau’r adolygwyr ymhlith ei gilydd ac yn ychwanegu eu sylwadau eu hunain lle bo’n briodol. Yn ddibynnol ar argymhellion yr adolygwyr a’r Ffurflen Crynodeb o’r Monograff a gyflwynir gyda’r llawysgrif, gall y Panel benderfynu ar ei argymhelliad ei hun o ran a ddylid cyhoeddi’r monograff ai peidio. Fel arall, gall y Panel ofyn i’r awdur neu’r golygydd sy’n cyflwyno fynd i’r afael ag argymhellion addasiadau’r adolygwyr yn gyntaf, ac i ddarparu rhestr o ymatebion i’r rhain i’r Panel, cyn i’r Panel wneud ei argymhelliad.
8. Os oes un o’r tri adolygydd yn methu â chyflwyno adroddiad adolygu, gall y Panel wneud argymhelliad yn seiliedig ar y ddau adroddiad arall.
9. Byddant yn dod i gytundeb pan fo mwyafrif aelodau’r Panel wedi mynegi’r un argymhelliad.
10. Ar ôl i’r Panel wneud argymhelliad, rhaid i’r Bwrdd
Golygyddol gymeradwyo hyn cyn y caiff y monograff ei dderbyn yn ffurfiol i’w
gyhoeddi a chyn i’r awdur neu’r golygydd gael gwybod. Ar ôl i’r monograff gael ei dderbyn, rhaid
i’r awdur neu’r golygydd sy’n cyflwyno gyflawni unrhyw addasiadau y cytunwyd
arnynt i’r llawysgrif cyn symud at y cam golygu.