Internal vs. external reviewing

For discussion of ideas, functional requirements, interests regarding the Open Monograph Press.

Moderators: jmacgreg, John

Forum rules
The Public Knowledge Project Support Forum is moving to

This forum will be maintained permanently as an archived historical resource, but all new questions should be added to the new forum. Questions will no longer be monitored on this old forum after March 30, 2015.
Posts: 81
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2013 1:49 pm

Internal vs. external reviewing

Postby stefan » Tue Oct 01, 2013 7:19 am


We are getting in our first reviews and I wonder how the correct workflow would be. We have one review by a series co-editor and one review by another researcher. Would the review by the co-editor be an internal review and the other one an external?

Why is this distinction useful?



Posts: 10015
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 12:56 pm

Re: Internal vs. external reviewing

Postby asmecher » Tue Oct 01, 2013 7:58 am

Hi Stefan,

Yes, that's a good example of internal vs. external review. The distinction is useful because the reviews address different aspects of the submission, as I understand it: the first is more about the suitability of the match between the press and the author, using resources the press has close to hand; the external review is about ensuring the scholarly quality is good using the larger community the press is working within to bring expertise to the subject. The two pools of reviewers are quite different: Internal Reviewers tend to be associated somehow with the press or the institution, and External Reviewers are not, but have knowledge about the subject.

Alec Smecher
Public Knowledge Project Team

Return to “OMP Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests