Critical Issues in Justice and Politics

Discussing the present - Influencing the future

Author and Submission Guidelines

Critical Issues in Justice and Politics welcomes electronic submissions from anyone who can write a high quality scholarly article. We are especially interested in scholarly, critical, and constructive articles which focus on an emerging or continuing issue in justice and/or politics. We also seek review essays (reviews of recent literature on a given topic), reports of significant justice or political issues, book reviews, and position papers worthy of scholarly review and comment. Submissions should be made electronically to levy@suu.edu.

It is the editorial policy of Critical Issues in Justice and Politics to accept submissions from all disciplines so long as the material relates to justice and politics. We also encourage submissions from practitioners, students, and others who have an interest in the topics.

Simultaneous Submissions

We prefer manuscripts which are not under review by other journals or publications. We endeavor to review all manuscripts in a timely fashion, so simultaneous submissions are not usually necessary. Refereed submissions are submitted within forty-eight hours of acceptance and we generally ask reviewers to complete their assignment within 10 working days. In most instances an editorial decision may be reached within a month of submission.

Non-refereed materials usually receive attention within the first week of submission. An initial editorial decision is often made within 5 business days.

Review Process

All papers submitted for refereed publication will be sent to at least two reviewers. We use a blind-review process which submits papers in anonymous format. At least two reviewers are generally used. If there is a clear split between the reviewers then a third reviewer may be used when necessary for clarification or additional comment. We do rely very heavily on our reviewers for insight and recommendations. All of our reviewers hold the appropriate degree and experience to qualify them for the particular project.

Reviewers are asked to evaluate manuscripts on the basis of their scholarly competence as well as the potential contribution to appropriate theory or related areas. Authors may not contact reviewers during the process, and reviewer names are not disclosed unless the reviewer agrees for such disclosure.

Authors who dispute the findings or suggestions of a reviewer may submit their response in writing. Final decisions on publication remain the domain of the editorial board.

Notification

There are many reasons why we may accept or reject a particular manuscript. As an example, a particularly popular topic may see several submissions from different authors. We may accept one (because it was first or because it is the best of the group) and reject the others. In other instances we may not initially accept a manuscript but might consider it with some changes. Of course there are also times when a manuscript simply does not meet our needs. Our response to submission will generally fall within one of the following areas:

• Accepted for Publication -- This means the manuscript has been accepted for publication in an upcoming edition. Notification will generally include a publication date along with an agreement for publication. Publication will not occur until the agreement is signed and returned to our office.
• Accepted with Changes -- This is a manuscript which has high interest for publication but needs changes to meet our needs. In most instances the changes do not reflect on the substance of the manuscript but instead focus on specific material which may be needed to make the manuscript more appealing. As an example, additional bibliographic information may be needed to verify some inference or statement within the manuscript. An agreement for publication is issued after the revisions are made. Revisions may be made by the author (if substantive) or by the editors, in which case the author must agree to the changes before publication occurs.
• Held with Recommendations -- This is used when we are not prepared to accept a manuscript but believe it may have merit with substantive changes. The most common reason is that statistical or methodological information is missing or inaccurate. Authors are usually encouraged to make specific changes and resubmit the manuscript for further review.
• Rejected with Recommendations -- A manuscript which needs extensive revision may receive this type of response. As a rule the manuscript shows some merit but needs enough change to warrant at least an initial rejection. In this case the author is usually encouraged to consider the changes and to resubmit the manuscript when it is revised.
• Rejected with Comments -- This category of manuscripts generally do not meet our needs for one of many reasons. It may be that the topic is simply not within our area or that the writing itself is not sufficient to support publication. This rejection often includes comments or suggestions from either the reviewers or the editorial staff.
• Rejected without Comment -- Sometimes a manuscript is simply not for us.

Notification is made via email to the address submitted with the manuscript.

Contact us