How to review a manuscript for History of Psychology: Guidelines for reviewers
Overall
- Sum up the author's argument, as you understand it, in your own words. Authors learn a lot from having their argument reflected back at them by someone else. Summarizing can also help you recognize any weak links in the argument.
- Consider the manuscript's suitability for History of Psychology. This journal deals with the history of the psy-sciences, broadly construed, so its articles have to appeal to a wide range of readers, both historians and historian-psychologists. Is there a way of broadening its appeal? Does the manuscript say something important even to a reader without specific knowledge of or experience with the subject matter? Is there a more broadly generalizable theme evident here? Could it be made even more explicit?
The three main things to look for are
- Argument: is it clearly set up at the outset? Is necessary background information provided, or does the author assume too much knowledge on the part of the reader? Are there clear transitions — does one point follow clearly from the next?
- Historiography: does the manuscript explain what it is contributing that is new and original to historical knowledge on this topic? Are there other bodies of secondary literature of which the author should be aware?
- Evidence: does the manuscript analyze primary sources? Does the analysis support the argument? Are more primary sources needed?
It is most helpful to authors if you are specific about the important points that need improvement, even mentioning page numbers where there are problems. If English language expression is a problem, you should mention that. (But an exhaustive listing of all the grammar and spelling errors and typos is not necessary.)
Tone of your review
- It is best to be constructive and to avoid snide or sarcastic remarks. Imagine that you are on the receiving end of your reviewer's report: how would you feel reading your comments? Or imagine that you are facing this author in person: how can you convey your criticisms in a constructive and not a destructive or aggressive way?
Please note that reviews are scored by the editor from 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest). In order to receive credit for your review, you must achieve a score of 4 or better.
Following these guidelines increases your chances of achieving a high score. If you have reviewed before and would like to check your scores, you may do so via Editorial Manager.