The Scientific Series of the Finnish Literature Society
Peer review procedure
Publications for the scientific series of the Finnish Literature Society (SKS) are reviewed by referees after an internal assessment by the SKS Publishing Department. Promising manuscripts submitted for the SKS scientific series will be sent for review by at least two external experts. All final publishing decisions relating to the scientific series of the SKS are made by the publishing committee constituted by experts.
Peer review of the scientific series of the SKS is carried out anonymously both from the perspective of authors and of referees. The identity of referees will not be disclosed to the author. The publishing coordinator of the SKS Publishing Department will manage the review system in such a way that information is not disclosed to authors or third parties.
The expert must present a reasoned opinion on the merits and flaws of the manuscript with regard to its contents, structure, illustrations if any, and other relevant matters.
Experts are requested to use the following scale in assessing manuscripts:
- Manuscript is ready for publication as it is.
- Manuscript can be accepted if some changes and amendments are carried out.
- Manuscript is not ready for publication, but is worth developing. A new manuscript will require a new round of reviews.
- Manuscript is not up to the level of the scientific series of the Finnish Literature Society, and should be rejected.
In the event a manuscript or article is assessed as a 2 or a 3 on the above scale, the authors shall be asked to attach a report of amendments to their amended manuscript, explaining in detail how the authors have taken into account the critical feedback in drafting their new manuscript. It is customary to then send the manuscript for a new round of reviews.
No fees will be paid for reviews, but expert review is considered an academic merit. Referees may mention in their CV or similar record that they have acted as a referee for the scientific series of the SKS.
When making a decision, the publishing committee will consider the manuscript as well as the reviews thereof. The expert body that nominated the referee may in its own assessment reach different conclusions than the referee. In such a case, the author will receive not only the review of his or her manuscript, but also the appended, differing opinion of the publisher. A positive review is not by itself a publishing decision.
These instructions are based on the instructions on peer review, confidentiality and conflicts of interest of the Association of Finnish Science Publishers and the Academy of Finland. We are committed to complying with the Finnish Advisory Board on Research Integrity’s guide Responsible conduct of research and procedures for handling allegations of misconduct in Finland.