4.1 Submissions and the review process

The total volume of submissions ranges widely from press to press. One press reported just 25 submissions during2005, while another reported 400. Five presses said they received between 75 and 150 submissions during 2005.

One of the most striking findings from the survey of art history editors concerns the rates of manuscriptacceptance at both the point of initial receipt and following formal review. By far the largest proportion of manuscripts (andproposals) is rejected at the stage of initial receipt; just 15% were sent out for formal review. Of those submitted for review,about 85% were accepted for publication. In other words, the winnowing process is very much "front-loaded." For every 50manuscripts or proposals submitted, 8 will be sent for review; 7 of these will survive the review process and be published.

Few survey respondents offered any specific comments about the review process. Those who did tended to value ithighly:

• It is extremely time-consuming, but the mark of a serious scholarly press.
• Qualified reviewers are often very busy, making it sometimes difficult to arrange appropriate peer review. I have beenstunned by the erudition and insight most scholars bring to the review process. In my experience, peer review has contributedenormously to the scholarly worth and appeal of the books I published.

One respondent candidly stated that the purpose of the review process was not so much to winnow books outas to tighten them up: "Generally I think that the peer review process is fair and useful. It gives an editor/press a goodidea of the importance of a project and its overall contribution to the field. That said, the process is to some extent'fixed.' Editors will always go to those reviewers who are inclined to be sympathetic to the project and methodology.Even so, reviewers who are so inclined will still be critical and will offer useful feedback and critique to the author. Ialways choose scholars who are 'responsible' reviewers and who want to help the author and project. I will not work withreviewers who engage in vitriol and character assassination (which is, alas, not uncommon)."