INSTRUCTIONS TO REFEREES
Portuguese Studies Review

Dear _______________,

The enclosed manuscript has been submitted to the Portuguese Studies Review (PSR). We would be grateful if you would referee this submission for us. The PSR depends greatly on its referees, and is indebted to them for preserving our usual high standards, as well as enabling timely publication.

Being an author yourself, you are probably aware of the frustrations involved in inexplicable delays in response or publication. Please let the Editors of the PSR know within one (1) week, preferably by e-mail, fax, or telephone, whether you will be able, or not, to referee this manuscript within four (4) to five (5) weeks. We fully recognize that referees may be sometimes unable to meet deadlines, and your returning promptly a manuscript under such circumstances will help us to avoid unnecessary delays.

If you do not feel that you are an appropriate referee, or if you are too busy at this time, we would appreciate your suggestion of an alternative qualified referee.

The PSR attempts to screen out inappropriate papers before sending them to referees, but in case this process has failed, we ask that you take a brief look at the manuscript now. Papers that are poorly prepared, or contain well-known ideas, are quickly identifiable. For such papers, detailed comments are not necessary. You should nonetheless state precisely and briefly your reasons for recommending to reject the submission. Please return any such paper promptly to the Editors, who will forward it to the author for rewriting.

As a PSR referee, you are acting as a gatekeeper to ensure the PSR stays on the cutting edge of scholarship while maintaining a reputation for academic discipline. The criteria for accepting manuscripts are described in the enclosed Instructions for Authors. You are not, however, expected to be an editor or a translator. The PSR is keenly aware that the interpretation of readability may depend on the referee's native language. We endeavour to match, as far as possible, the native languages of submissions and referees, but situations often arise where the best qualified referee with regard to the subject matter is not a native speaker of the submission's language. We urge you to exercise common sense in such cases.

Each referee is asked to provide (a) a signed cover letter recommending acceptance or rejection, with appropriate qualifiers guided by the criteria and suggestions provided below; (b) an unsigned anonymous report for transmission to the author. Please provide a tactfully written and clear report. If it is cleanly printed or typed, dispassionate and objective, it may be sent directly to the author at a great saving of time. In your report please separate clearly, by typing them on different pages, those recommendations that may be forwarded to the author from those that could be of great value to the PSR Editors in their decision-making process, but might be eventually considered insensitive. Of course, the quality of a manuscript should never be compromised by withholding any remarks that might help an author to prepare a final revised draft. If you find it necessary to write suggested changes on the manuscript for the benefit of the author, please send us the marked pages, not the complete manuscript, with your report.

In your assessment, concentrate on the following aspects and considerations:

Overall Quality: Is the submission suitable for publication in an established international journal?

Appropriateness: Is the topic of the paper of interest to the Portuguese studies community, or to related scholarly audiences?

Originality of Argument:

(a) Do the ideas expressed in the paper represent sufficiently original work to warrant publication in the PSR?

(b) Does the paper represent a significant advance over previously published work? If a substantial number of its ideas appeared previously, please cite references.

(c) Critical surveys and analyses of existing work are acceptable, but they should provide some new insight or collation of information.

Originality of Research: Is the paper based on new sources, new or innovative combinations of sources, or on unpublished archival material?

Technical Merit:

(a) Are the ideas expressed in the paper based on sound reasoning and analysis? Are there any noticeable instances of misleading argumentation?

(b) Is the paper of suitable length, with no parts too brief or too long? If not, please suggest specific omissions or parts that should be expanded. Should some of the material (for example, long tables) be simplified?

(c) Does the title of the paper suitably capture the intent and content of the manuscript?

(d) Does the introduction relate the paper to current literature and capture the intent and purpose of the paper?

Academic Merit:

(a) Does the paper adequately document background material and references?

(b) Is the note apparatus appropriately designed and used? Are all references relevant, in so far as you can judge from your knowledge of the literature?

(c) Are there appropriate and adequate references to closely related work and literature?

Clarity:

(a) Is the paper well organized, and are the ideas expressed in a clear, concise and understandable manner?

(c) Are tables, figures, graphs, or maps clearly referenced and explained, with suitable captions? Are they all useful? Is there unnecessary duplication?

You may use the following checklistwhen preparing your report. The checklist is followed by suggested recommendations to the PSR Editors.

Evaluation Checklist:

	Acceptable	Minor Revisions	Major Revisions	Unacceptable
Significance
Originality
Generality
Presentation
Scholarship
Data/Methods
Reasoning
Clarity
Length

Possible Recommendations:

( ) Publish without change (please give reasons).

( ) Publish after author has considered the optional revisions mentioned in
the report.

( ) Publish after author has made the revisions mentioned in the report.
(I do not need to see the manuscript again.)

( ) Revisions are necessary. Return to me on resubmittal.

( ) Revisions are necessary. On resubmittal, send to __________________________

( ) Manuscript is more appropriate for
another journal ________________________________________________

( ) Do not publish; see report.

( ) Other; see report.

The PSR normally uses a double-blind refereeing process. Your refereeing will remain entirely anonymous unless you explicitly specify otherwise through signed waiver. In order to speed up the reviewing process, referees may be asked to download from our FTP site, if possible, manuscripts submitted in digital form, and upload their amendments and comments to it. Alternatively, at the referee's request, PSR will arrange file transfers to/from a server at the referee's location.

You may seek the advice of colleagues when preparing your report, but please remember that the paper has not yet been published and is thus privileged information. An author retains all rights to unpublished work, and the referee should not use in his or her own research ideas or material obtained exclusively through the refereeing process.

With sincere thanks for your assistance,

The Editors
Portuguese Studies Review