Peer Review Process
All submissions to the journal receive three sets of comments, one set from Faculty at LSE and two from 4th year PPE student editors. All such commenting is double blind. In the first instance, in order to maximally promote opportunities to learn, all authors are given a chance to revise and resubmit their work. A selection of the best work among the resubmitted articles is made by the Faculty members on the Editorial Board.
Reviewers are asked to provide comment on the below topics and guidelines:
- Content: Is the submission original, relevant and rigorous? Is the author’s depth of understanding of the issues researched adequate? Are the sources and references adequate? Has the existing knowledge base been explored and built upon? Are the chosen methodologies appropriate and have they and the evidential base been appropriately used? Does the conclusion reflect the argument in the main body text and bring something new to the debate?
- Structure and argument: Does the abstract summarise the arguments in a succinct and accurate way? Is the manuscript logically structured and do the arguments flow coherently? Are the arguments fully evidenced and substantiated? Does the introduction signpost the arguments in the logical way and does the conclusion adequately summarise them?
- Figures/tables: Does the author’s use of tables, charts, figures or maps illustrate the arguments and support the evidential base? Is the quality of the formatting and presentation adequate?
- Formatting: Are the citations and references formatted to house-style?
- Language: Is the text well written and jargon free? Please comment on the quality of English and need for grammatical improvement.
- Open Submissions
- Peer Reviewed