In recent years, research activity on the recovery technique known as low salinity waterflooding has sharply increased. The main motivation for field application of low salinity waterflooding is the improvement of oil recovery by acceleration of production ('oil faster') compared to conventional high salinity brine injection. Up to now, most research has focused on the core scale by conducting coreflooding and spontaneous imbibition experiments. These tests serve as the main proof that low salinity waterflooding can lead to additional oil recovery. Usually, it is argued that if the flooding experiments show a positive shift in relative permeability curves, field application is justified provided the economic considerations are also favorable. In addition, together with field pilots, these tests resulted in several suggested trends and underlying mechanisms related to low salinity water injections that potentially explain the additional recovery. While for field application one can rely on the core scale laboratory tests which can provide the brine composition dependent saturation functions such as relative permeability, they are costly, time consuming and challenging. It is desirable to develop predictive capability such that new candidates can be screened effectively or prioritized. This has not been yet achieved and would require under-pinning the underlying mechanism(s) of the low salinity response. Recently, research has intensified on smaller length scales i.e. the sub-pore scale. This coincides with a shift in thinking. In field and core scale tests the main goal was to correlate bulk properties of rock and fluids to the amount of oil recovered. Yet in the tests on the sub-pore scale the focus is on ruling out irrelevant mechanisms and understanding the physics of the processes leading to a response to low salinity water. Ultimately this should lead to predictive capability that allows to pre-select potential field candidates based on easily obtained properties, without the need of running time and cost intensive tests. However, low salinity waterflooding is a cooperative process in which multiple mechanisms acting on different length and time scales aid the detachment, coalescence, transport, banking, and eventual recovery of oil. This means investigating only one particular length scale is insufficient. If the physics behind individual mechanisms and their interplay does not transmit through the length scales, or does not explain the observed fast and slow phenomena, no additional oil may be recovered at core or field scale. Therefore, the mechanisms are not discussed in detail in this review, but placed in a framework on a higher level of abstraction which is 'consistency across the scales'. In doing so, the likelihood and contribution of an individual mechanism to the additional recovery of oil can be assessed. This framework shows that the main uncertainty lies in how results from sub-pore scale experiments connect to core scale results, which happens on the length scale in between: the pore-network scale. On the pore-network scale two different types low salinity responses can be found: responses of the liquidliquid or the solid-liquid interfaces. The categorization is supported by the time scale differences of the (optimal) response between liquid-liquid and solid-liquid interfaces. Differences in time scale are also observed between flow regimes in water-wet and mixed-wet systems. These findings point to the direction of what physics should be carried from sub-pore to core scale, which may aid in gaining predictive capability and screening tool development. Alternatively, a more holistic approach of the problems in low salinity waterflooding is suggested.