Pacific University Press Peer Review Process
The Pacific University Press’ goal for its review and editorial process is to provide authors with substantive, constructive feedback that will improve the quality and impact of their work. In this process, the Press values respect and collegiality and expects that these values will be reflected in manuscript reviews and communications between authors, editors, and reviewers.
Reviewers for manuscripts under consideration are identified through a combination of author recommendations, self-nominations, and recruitment. The press maintains a database of qualified reviewers to aid in reviewer selections. Reviewers are paid a $200 honorarium upon completion of the review.
Pacific University Press and Tualatin Books
A minimum of two external reviewers who are disciplinary/subject experts are selected for each manuscript that is designated for review. Ideally, no more than one of the reviewers will be recommended by the author (if three reviewers are used, no more than two will be recommended by the author).
Reading panels for 1849 Editions consist of 2-3 readers, at least one of whom is an experienced author and one is an avid consumer of the relevant genre. An “experienced author” is an individual who has at least two publications in the last 10 years (not self-published*) in the relevant form or genre. An “avid consumer” is an individual who has extensive critical experience with the form or genre under consideration--for example, as a professor of literature, a literary critic or reviewer, an editor, or a graduate student.
*This definition does not assume a qualitative difference between externally-published and self-published authors; rather, it expresses a preference for authors who are familiar with the review and editorial process of a publishing house.
Within the peer review process for its imprints, the Press employs models that are appropriate to the nature of the work under review. To the extent possible, the Press will also accommodate authors that wish to explore more open forms or aspects of review. However, the Press must ensure that all forms of review provide equal rigor so that all titles meet the same standards of quality. To that end, the Press supports three forms of pre-publication review to varying degrees across its imprints:
- Double-blind: Author and reviewer identities are unknown to one another.
- Double-blind review is available only for 1849 Editions, the Press’ literary imprint. Double-blind review offers authors anonymity during the review process if they so desire. Authors who don’t desire anonymity may request single-blind (and/or signed) review.
- Single-blind: Author names are known to reviewers, but reviewer identities are unknown to authors.
- Single-blind review is the default model for the Pacific University Press and Tualatin Books imprints. The Press will publish works that may come from small communities of scholars, and the preparation involved in creating a book manuscript in general--which may involve sharing ideas informally, at conferences, or through articles--means that it may be impossible to truly blind a manuscript to potential reviewers. (For similar reasons, in some cases it may also be impossible to truly blind review feedback, but that will be handled on a case by case basis). The Press will consider double-blind review if author concerns warrant.
- Signed: Reviewers disclose their identities to authors when submitting their reviews.
- Reviewers for all imprints will always have the option of signing their reviews, whether or not author identities are disclosed to them. Authors may request signed reviews as well, but if the Press is unable to identify qualified reviewers willing to submit signed reviews, blind reviews will be solicited.
Collaboration Options for Reviewers
In some cases, a reviewer may be open to working directly with an author, or may wish to explore possibilities for collaboration. If so, the Press will provide the author with a message from the reviewer, as well as the reviewer’s contact information. Further communication will be left to the author’s discretion. However, if the author and reviewer wish to work directly together on the manuscript under review, the Press will facilitate the use of collaborative technologies as needed.
Open Review Options for Authors and Reviewers
Prior to the solicitation of reviews, authors may request an open review. This means that reviewer comments (signed or unsigned) and author responses will be published online along with the digital edition of the book at the time of publication. Reviewers will be notified that the author has requested an open review at the time that a review is solicited. If the Press is unable to find adequate reviewers willing to participate in an open review, the review process will be closed.
Whether or not an author has requested an open review, reviewers may request that their names be published online along with the digital edition of the book at the time of publication. This provides a form of public acknowledgement for the reviewer of their service to the Press.
Although the Press does not currently support any additional review processes (e.g. open pre-publication review, post-publication review), authors who wish to use an alternate form of review are encouraged to discuss it with the Press, as accommodations may be possible.
Reviewers are provided with rubrics to guide their critique of the manuscript in question, and have 6-8 weeks to complete their reviews. In addition, reviewers are expected to:
- Declare all potential conflicts of interest
- Provide constructive feedback that will aid the author(s) in strengthening the manuscript
- Maintain the confidentiality of the review process
Apply to be a Reviewer
If you are interested in reviewing manuscripts for the Pacific University Press, please complete the online reviewer interest form. You will only be contacted if/when your indicated interests and experience are an appropriate fit for a manuscript under consideration by the press.