The refereeing process here is quite different from that used for refereeing papers. Chapters that have been submitted for publication in an edited collection are likely to be longer and written by an authority in the field. The task of the referee here is typically to identify the good points in the chapter and perhaps the weaker ones, and to indicate how things might be improved. Comments may be asked for on the length of the chapter and the coverage of the literature review: Is it up to date? Has anything been missed out? Is it too long? The general aim here is to judge if the content is appropriate and perhaps suggest some possible improvements.
Was this article helpful?