Editorial Process
Peer Review Guidelines
Peer review is a central part of The Hinksey Review's editorial process. Its purpose is to assess the quality, originality, and publication readiness of each paper, while providing authors with constructive feedback that can strengthen their work.
Each review should take approximately 60 minutes. Reviewers are expected to read the manuscript carefully, complete the scoring form, and provide a written review of 200–600 words.
Reviewer Responsibilities
Reviewers should assess whether the paper:
- — Poses a clear and worthwhile research question
- — Makes an identifiable original contribution
- — Develops a coherent argument or analysis
- — Uses evidence responsibly and accurately
- — Is clearly written and logically structured
- — Offers conclusions that follow from the analysis
The review should not only identify weaknesses or corrections. It should also help the author understand how the paper could be improved.
Review Criteria
Reviewers will score the paper from 1 to 10 in four areas:
The novelty and significance of the paper's contribution.
The soundness of the methodology, reasoning, and argument.
The quality of the writing, organisation, and structure.
The strength, relevance, and accuracy of the data, citations, and support.
Scores should reflect the quality of the paper as submitted, not what it might become after substantial revision.
Written Review
The written review should be specific, constructive, and grounded in the manuscript itself. A strong review identifies the paper's main strengths, explains its most important weaknesses, and offers practical suggestions for improvement.
Reviewers may comment on the research question, originality, methodology, evidence, structure, use of sources, counterarguments, or conclusion. Vague comments such as "needs more detail" or "the writing should be better" should be avoided unless they are accompanied by specific examples.
Use of AI Tools
Reviewers may not use AI tools to read, summarise, assess, score, or draft their reviews.
Peer review requires independent human judgement. If a review appears to have been generated by AI, The Hinksey Review may return the review for revision, move the reviewer's own submission lower in the review queue, or reject the reviewer's own submission from consideration.
Confidentiality and Conduct
Manuscripts and reviews must be treated as confidential. Reviewers should not attempt to identify the author, contact the author, or discuss the manuscript with others.
Feedback should be honest, fair, and respectful. Critical comments should address the work, not the author.
Role of Peer Review
Peer reviewers do not make the final publication decision. Their reviews help determine whether a paper proceeds to editorial review, is returned for revision, or is declined from further consideration.