Peer Review Process

The review process at Nordisk barnehageforskning (Nordic Early Childhood Educational Research) is single blind. Manuscripts are assessed by at least two independent peer reviewers. The journal’s editors make the final decision regarding acceptance/rejection of the manuscript.

SUBJECT EDITORS

As of 2021 the journal has recruited a number of subject editors who are responsible for leading the work of evaluating individual submissions by quickly initiating the process of peer review when manuscripts come in, and then following their progression through the review phase until articles are accepted and ready for publication. In cases where recommendations conflict, the subject editor will make a qualified assessment. If the subject editor is uncertain, however, the editors-in-chief will determine whether an assessment from a third or more reviewers is necessary. Cappelen Damm is responsible for the technical aspects of preparing the article: language-editing, other formalities (references, tables and figures, etc.) and layout. 

Editorial board

In addition to the subject editors, the journal has an editorial board comprised of researchers with varied backgrounds and expertise in preschool education, and therefore fluent in the various thematic areas and subjects within preschool research. The editorial board assists in the peer review process and quality assurance of the journal’s content. In addition to the editorial board’s peer reviews, supplemental reviews may be arranged by subject editors to ensure the most qualified peer review possible.

Peer review process

Every manuscript submitted to the journal is evaluated initially by the editor-in-chief, or a subject editor designated by the editor-in-chief, with respect to the submission’s relevance to the scope of the journal’s publishing. Scientifically relevant articles are referred further for peer review.

The subject editor assigned to the submission is responsible for recruiting appropriately qualified peer reviewers to assess the manuscript’s merit for publication. In striving for thorough and effective quality reviews, the process usually takes up to two months from the date of submission until the initial reviews are received.

Articles considered beyond the journal’s scope or scientifically or linguistically substandard are immediately declined. In such cases the editors may include comments and suggestions to encourage the authors to submit their work again.

Peer reviewers have the following options for assessment of manuscripts:

  1. Accept manuscript (i.e., as is, no revisions necessary)
  2. Revision required (i.e., accepted after minor requested revisions)
  3. Resubmit for review (i.e., the revised version will be subject to another round of peer review)
  4. Decline submission (i.e., the manuscript is substandard)

Should a member of a journal’s editorial team submit a manuscript, a co-editor will be assigned to take charge of the entire review process and act as editor for the particular article. Alternatively, the co-editor may assign an external trusted expert. The co-editor or external expert will be specified as responsible editor in the published version of the article to affirm that the editor who made the submission had nothing to do with the handling of this particular article.

All manuscripts submitted to journals published by NOASP are handled through the NOASP platform. In cases where a guest editor is involved in carrying out the peer review process, NOASP provides support and ensures that all material is handled through the platform. It is the responsibility of the editor-in-chief to appoint guest editors of special issues. Guest editors are informed that the practices outlined above also apply to them.

Peer reviewers are expected to disclose any competing interests. Reviewers shall be objective and constructive. They are to consider, for example, the methodological rigor of the submission, the appropriateness of findings on the basis of methodology, the appropriateness of conclusions, and proper establishment of the contribution within the broader context of the scholarly literature. All reviewed manuscripts are treated confidentially.

MORE INFORMATION