Peer Review Process

The SJLIS is committed to peer-review integrity and to upholding the highest standards of review.

1. Initial evaluation. A submitted manuscript first undergoes an initial evaluation by the editor. If it does not conform to the aims and scope of the journal, it is returned to the author for amendments before peer review.
2. Desk decision. Manuscripts may be rejected without peer review at this point if they are out of scope for the journal or otherwise unsuitable.
3. Anonymous peer review. Once the editor has assessed a manuscript as suitable, it is reviewed anonymously by two independent experts.
4. Reviewers' reports. The reviewers evaluate the paper and submit their reports to the editor.
5. Decision. The editor reaches a verdict on the manuscript and informs the corresponding author.

Possible decisions

• Accept — the manuscript is accepted as it stands or with minor editorial changes.
• Minor revisions — small changes are needed; the editor checks the revised version.
• Major revisions — substantial changes are needed; the revised version is normally sent back to the reviewers.
• Reject — the manuscript is not suitable for publication in the SJLIS.

When the two reviewers disagree, the editor may ask a third reviewer before deciding.

Target times

The journal aims to keep to the times below. They are targets, not guarantees, and may be longer when reviewers are hard to find or during holiday periods.

Stage	Target time
Acknowledgement with manuscript ID	Immediately (online form) or within 3 working days (email)
Initial evaluation by the editor	Within 2 weeks of submission
Peer review (each reviewer)	4 weeks
First decision to the author	Within 8 weeks of submission
Author's revisions	2 weeks for minor revisions, 6 weeks for major revisions
Decision on a revised manuscript	Within 4 weeks of resubmission
Publication after acceptance	In the next issue (June or December), after copy-editing and the author's check of the proofs

Revised manuscripts

Authors return the revised manuscript with a short response letter explaining how each reviewer comment was addressed, or why a change was not made. Changes should be highlighted in the manuscript. A revision not received within the time allowed may be treated as a new submission. Normally no more than two rounds of revision are allowed.