Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Review process

This journal uses a single-anonymised model of peer review. The author does not know the identity of the reviewers, but the reviewers know the identity of the author. 

The Referees reports are received by the Editorial Board Member. Once at least two Reports are received, the EBM makes a recommendation to the Editor. This may involve one or more rounds of revision by the authors.  The Final Decision to publish or reject is made by the Editor or a member of the Executive Editorial Team on his behalf.

Further information on the review process and instructions for reviewers can be found at the following link

Revision of papers

If a paper is returned to authors for possible amendment or revision, a period of 2 months will normally be allowed. The editors are ready to consider a revised or rewritten paper at any time, but after 2 months it will be considered a new paper and given a new submission date unless an extension has been agreed with the Editor.

Appeals process

Appeals against an editorial decision will be considered under exceptional circumstances only. Any appeal should be sent to the Editor-in-Chief and must be received within 3 months from the date of the rejection letter. Such appeals must state clearly the grounds for the appeal. Uninvited resubmissions will not be considered.

If you have any other concerns about the handling of a manuscript or editorial processes of the journal, please contact the Editorial Office or the journal’s publisher, Cambridge University Press, at publishingethics@cambridge.org.