Social Philosophy Today
SUBMISSION GUIDELINES
Social Philosophy Today is a peer-reviewed journal published on behalf of the North American Society for Social Philosophy. We welcome article-length submissions in any area of social and political philosophy, as well as shorter replies to previously published SPT articles. The acceptance rate for article-length submissions is approximately 30%.
Each annual volume will include a section on the theme of the most recent International Social Philosophy Conference. If you would like your article-length submission to be considered for this section, please indicate so and submit by December 31 of the conference year.
Authors must confirm that they have not used generative AI to contribute to the content of manuscripts submitted to Social Philosophy Today. Any other author use of AI tools must be disclosed to the editors at the time of submission.
Manuscript Preparation
Submissions must be prepared for anonymous review.
The maximum length for an article is 8,000 words, including notes and references, but 5,000-6,000 words is preferred. Articles must include an abstract at the beginning of no more than 200 words.
The maximum length for a reply to a previous SPT article is 4,000 words, including notes and references.
For citations, please use the The Chicago Manual of Style author-date system.
Manuscripts should be submitted in Word format (.docx, .doc). They should be double-spaced, including quotations, notes, and references. Please use endnotes, rather than footnotes.
Submissions should be sent to the co-editors at [email protected] and [email protected]. If the submission is co-authored, please provide the name(s) and email address(es) of the co-author(s) in the text of your email message.
Submission of a manuscript to Social Philosophy Today is understood to imply that the manuscript is not under consideration by any other journal and is offered to Social Philosophy Today for first publication.
Note: Authors of manuscripts accepted for first publication in Social Philosophy Today are free to reuse their texts in other publications they write or edit - no further permission is required. We only require acknowledgement of original publication in Social Philosophy Today. For more information see Rights & Permissions.
Publications Ethics Statement
The editorial team of Social Philosophy Today is committed to ensuring the integrity of the publication process. Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to confirm a chain of reasoning or experimental result. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers must treat received manuscripts as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviews should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the paper.
The Publisher will respond to alleged or proven cases of research misconduct, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism in close collaboration with the editors. The publisher will ensure that appropriate measures are taken to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question if necessary. This may include the publication of an erratum, clarification or, in the most severe case, the retraction of the affected work. The publisher, together with the editors, shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, and under no circumstances encourage such misconduct or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place.
|