PRISM: Peer Review Information Service for Monographs

The Peer Review Information Service for Monographs (PRISM) is provided by DOAB Foundation as part of the OPERAS Service Catalogue. PRISM is currently operating in beta phase and will move into production in 2022.

PRISM provides academic publishers with the opportunity of displaying information about their peer review procedures across their entire catalogue, for individual book series, or even for single books. The goal of the service is to provide transparency around the peer review procedures – opening the black box so to speak – and thereby build trust in academic book publishing.

The peer review information provided by the publisher will be visible to any reader and will also be added to the metadata of the books distributed worldwide by DOAB.

Criteria for inclusion

PRISM procedure

Publishers need to apply for the PRISM service through an online application process. They are asked to provide information about the elements that will be reviewed, including links to the information on their website. DOAB reviews the application, classifies the peer review process, and checks the information on the publisher’s website.

Terms and conditions

Publishers can request to be included in PRISM if they agree to the terms and conditions of the service.

Publishers need to provide correct information and may be suspended from using PRISM if there is evidence that the information they provided is incorrect. Suspended publishers may be required to reapply for the service and their inclusion may be revoked. DOAB reserves the right to announce such measures through its media channels.

DOAB Scientific Committee

The DOAB Scientific Committee advises the DOAB Executive Board and the Supervisory Board on scientific matters and monitors the development and implementation of PRISM.

The Scientific Committee (SC) consists of members with experience or knowledge in SSH scholarship and the editorial side of monograph publishing. SC members have a diverse background, representing different publishing cultures and disciplines. The SC is an independent body, to be consulted in scientific matters. Its members cannot have other roles within DOAB. SC members are appointed for a period of 4 years, and can be reappointed for new terms. Members of the Executive Board and the Supervisory Board cannot be members of the Scientific Committee. Decisions are made by consensus and, if consensus cannot be reached, by majority vote.

The chair has been appointed by the members of the SC. The chair of the SC acts as advisor to the Executive Board.

Scientific Committee members

Terms of Reference for the Scientific Committee of DOAB

Peer Review Information application

The following are the current questions provided to a publisher wishing to take part in PRISM. The publisher needs to answer these questions and the answers will be reviewed by DOAB. Subsequently, DOAB will decide on including the publisher.

Review timing - Question A: At what stage is the peer review being conducted?

  • Before submission
  • After submission
  • After publication

Reviewed object - Question B: What is being reviewed?

  • Book proposal
  • Full manuscript
  • Sample chapters
  • Book proposal & Full manuscript
  • Book proposal & Sample chapters
  • Research paper
  • Research proposal
  • Preprint

Review Process - Question C: Who conducts the PR?

  • A single peer reviewer
  • Multiple peer reviewers
  • Peer to peer review
  • Crowd sourced reviewers
  • Editor or series editor
  • Editorial board
  • A single peer reviewer & editor or series editor
  • A single peer reviewer & editorial board
  • Multiple peer reviewers & editor or series editor
  • Multiple peer reviewers & editorial board
  • Peer to peer review & editor or series editor
  • Peer to peer review & editorial board
  • Crowd sourced reviewers & editor or series editor
  • Crowd sourced reviewers & editorial board

Review Process - Question D: Level of openness?

  • Single blind peer review
  • Double blind peer review
  • Unblinded peer review
  • Open peer review (the review is public)

Decision process - Question E: Who oversees the peer review process?

  • Publisher
  • Editor or series editor
  • Editorial board or committee
  • Scientific committee