|
|
Q: How extensive should the referee report be?
There is no set length. You should not overwhelm the author with comments, however. Lengthy referee reports generally do not bring about a substantial improvement in the submitted material. Be concise, to the point, and focus on the really important aspects. |
Q: Does the referee report have to be in English?
No. Most languages are accepted. The referee report also does not have to match the language of the article, although you should probably tailor your comments to the language of the paper, to avoid problems arising out of translation. |
Q: How quickly does the PSR expect to receive a report?
As soon as possible. Leaving authors in suspense for a long time creates poor publisher/referee/author dynamics. If you foresee that writing your report will require extended time, e-mail us so that we could adjust our schedules. |
Q: Should the referee report include suggestions for further research and bibliographic recommendations?
That is at your discretion. If you feel the article would benefit from such advice, and if you are generous enough to provide it, perhaps with a recommendation that the author(s) acknowledge in a footnote such input from an anonymous referee, then by all means help the author(s) out. It is not, however, a requirement. |
Q: Is there a prescribed referee report format?
No. Given that we publish articles from a diversity of disciplines and in various languages, we are adaptable as far as the format of your report is concerned. Essentially, we are an informed mediator between you and the author. It is quite all right to submit your report by e-mail attachment (PDF preferred but all other common formats accepted), as long as all confidentiality rules are observed and communication occurs only between the referee and PSR editorial staff.
|
Q: Will I get to read the draft article a second time?
Only in exceptional circumstances. The Editors will communicate your report to the author(s), and will check whether the recommendations have been implemented to an acceptable extent. Serious problems would have to develop for you to be contacted a second time and asked for a complete re-reading.
Q: How thoroughly should I support my evaluation?
This may vary depending on circumstances. It is helpful to authors, however, if the referee's evaluation includes sufficient explanation and/or documentation to make the comments clear, unequivocal, and easily understood.. |
Q: What are the PSR publishing ethics guidelines?
The PSR adheres to widely observed policy and ethical guidelines (e.g. those of COPE) designed to protect the qualilty and integrity of academic practice and to preserve the reputation of scholarly journals: (a) Confidentiality: the peer review process is to be treated as strictly confidential and subject to rules on handling sensitive information, with respect to data protection or to eventual disclosure under FOIA or similar legislation; (b) General Expectations: referees as well as all editorial staff are expected to: handle all submissions fairly; to act objectively; to hold scholarly significance and quality as key governing criteria; to ensure that referee conflicts of interest are transparent throughout the entire process; to handle suspected or undisclosed conflicts of interest in accordance with best practice; to deal fairly with appeals; and to handle all instances of ethical problems in an objective, sensitive, confidential, and careful process. Referees should not keep on file copies of the draft articles that they have reviewed, once the process is completed and a referee report has been delivered.
|
|
| |
Access and Distribution
Look for us at Gale/CENGAGE and EBSCOhost e-resource and database centers in your subscribing library (our abstracts will also be restreamed at ProQuest). Soon on JSTOR. Ask your library to subscribe. Or subscribe in person. Previews of the PSR are available through Google Books (program now discontinued, replaced by previews on our own sites).
BIBLID
National Library of Canada Cataloguing Record
Portuguese Studies Review
ISSN 1057-1515 print
Semiannual
v. : ill. : 23 cm
1. Portugal–Civilization–Periodicals. 2. Africa, Portuguese-speaking–Civilization–Periodicals. 3. Brazil–Civilization–Periodicals. 4. Portugal–Civlisation–Périodiques. 5. Afrique lusophone– Civilisation–Périodiques. 6. Brésil–Civilisation–Périodiques.
DP532 909/.0917/5691005 21
Library of Congress Cataloguing Record
Portuguese Studies Review
ISSN 1057-1515 print
Semiannual
v. : ill. : 23 cm
1. Portugal–Civilization–Periodicals. 2. Africa, Portuguese-speaking–Civilization–Periodicals. 3. Brazil–Civilization–Periodicals.
DP532 .P67 909/.091/5691 20 92-659516
Indexing: American History and Life, Historical Abstracts, International Political Science Abstracts, Political Science Complete, Social Services Abstracts, Sociological Abstracts, Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; EBSCOHost. Archive: Google Books (preview program now terminated, replaced by a preview program on our own sites); GALE/Cengage Learning (Academic OneFile).
|
|
|
|
Follow the PSR on Academia.edu. Or not. Your entirely free choice. Yes, authors are archiving their offprints on Academia.edu with our full permission. But we are not shilling for academia.edu or any such. We are NOT an Academia 'ambassador', and do not seek to be such. We get nothing from the above banner. Nothing. Not even 1/100 click dime. So, soggy cliches like "you are just doing this for the likes and clicks" simply will not work, ever, because as you may have noticed we are NOT on any social media. So inconvenient, right? We are only concerned with core academic integrity, hard as that is today. The PSR has NEVER paid its Academia account, on purpose. To slam shut every conceptual window that would make it possible to smear us with cheap-cheesy claims about 'paying for bumping'. Thus, we do not pay. Done. End of 'conversation'.
