Social Philosophy Today
Social Philosophy Today is a peer-reviewed journal published on behalf of the North American Society for Social Philosophy. The topic of each annual volume is based on the theme of the annual International Social Philosophy Conference. Submitted manuscripts are accepted for publication on the basis of anonymous peer-review. The acceptance rate is approximately 30%.
Originality: Submission of a manuscript is understood to imply that it is not under consideration by any other journal and is offered to Social Philosophy Today for first publication.
Length: 6,000-word limit
Title sheet: To facilitate anonymous review, the author should not be identified in the manuscript or the abstract, or in any electronic signature. Contact information, including name, institutional affiliation, and an e-mail address, must be submitted as an attachment on a separate title sheet.
Abstract: Manuscripts must include an abstract of no more than 200 words placed at the beginning of the article.
File type and format: Manuscripts should be submitted in Word format (.docx, .doc). They should be double-spaced (including quotations, notes, and references), and the right margin should not be justified.
Citation style: We use The Chicago Manual of Style “author-date” system, and request that authors use this in their submissions. More information is available here.
Bibliography: Please attach a bibliography to the manuscript. For references use The Chicago Manual of Style.
Formatting: Please consult our Social Philosophy Today Formatting Guidelines
Permissions: Authors of manuscripts accepted for publication will be asked to complete a publication agreement to give the Philosophy Documentation Center permission to publish and preserve their work in all formats. Authors retain the right to reuse their work in all other publications they write or edit, with acknowledgement of the original publication in Social Philosophy Today. See Rights & Permissions for more informatrion.
Submission Procedure: Manuscripts and title sheets should be submitted by email as separate attachments to [email protected].
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.