Skip to main content

What We Learned at Two Political Science Conferences

Jeannine Bell, Susan Sterett, & Margot Young 

Your hard working editors attended the Midwest Political Science Association and Western Political Science Association conferences in April.  We participated on panels with other editors to discuss journals and editing practices.  We also had informal conversations about our experiences with reviewers, administrative processes around having multiple editors, and the kinds of email requests and responses that editors get.  We also compared notes on our experiences as authors submitting to journals. 



So, first we learned Law and Society Review gets bragging rights for turning around most manuscripts in two months, from submission to decision.  We learned that practice from Tim Johnson and Joachim Savelsberg, the previous editors.  We thought with all the pressure on faculty to get their work out these days, all journal aimed for a quick turnaround.  The journal editors we spoke to at the conferences do.  We heard complaints, though, about journals taking eleven months for a review.  We won't do that.

The biggest limit on turning manuscripts around is reviewers who agree to a review but don't get the review in.  Delayed reviews can mean looking for another reviewer, and slowing down the process for authors.  

Editors discussed different practices concerning shapting a journal, bringing us to reflect on our practices.  Some journals have clear ideas of the kind of work they aim to publish; others aim to publish the best work in the field they can, rather than shaping around a particular set of questions or methods.  We like that; we are not favoring a version of excellent sociolegal scholarship.  

Finally, we sometimes add a new reviewer after a resubmission, rather than only going to the initial reviewers.  Other journals do the same.  Initial reviewers are necessary to assessing revised manuscripts but new reviewers can help both us and the authors.  Sadly, we do not have space to publish every manuscript that reviews well.  
Every journal keeps a backlog of articles, in queue for publication.  We cannot keep a large one as we are editing for three years and the next editors get to decide what they will do.  So you can expect to be in print within six months or so of an acceptance.

Finally, thanks to the suggestions from Wiley, we will be joining other journals and moving to 'early view'; accepted articles will be available online as soon as they are ready.  So, we look forward to reading your manuscripts (and your reviews)!  



Popular posts from this blog

How to Tell When to Send Your Paper into a Journal

By Susan Sterett and Paul Collins

A group of faculty and graduate students in the Five College Seminar in Legal Studies in Western Massachusetts talked on a beautiful Friday afternoon about submitting a manuscript to a journal, something that feels so scary to some people they won’t do it. Other people send things in readily, and have tricks to manage any difficulties. If you don’t send it in, you won’t get it in the conversations you want to be part of. The academic conversation will be the worse for it. Still, how do you know? Especially because we are often the harshest judges of our work. Here are some alternatives the group came up with:
When an advisor, or colleague, or coauthor says it’s time;When you have gathered feedback on your work at a conference or working group and revised;When you’ve checked that it fits with the structure and format of articles in the journal you want to send it to, and it engages issues the journal engages;When you can’t stand to look at it any…

Sociolegal Studies, Disaster, Climate Change

By Susan Sterett
 The devastation in Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands, Houston and Florida, the hurricanes, the fires in California, the fires in British Columbia, are not visible enough in sociolegal scholarship, to our loss. Students and others find the overlap of humanitarian assistance, weather events, and climate change compelling; they also lose. Anthropologists who work internationally have pointed out the difficult governance in humanitarian assistance outside the United States: what is the life that is saved? What are the tools essential to saving lives? What kind of governing does lifesaving justify? How do the NGOs who contract governing in disaster, including in disastrous states, bring law? Humanitarian assistance is where many young people want to be, and it looks like where the help is. It’s often militarized, and governs in exception. Often left unacknowledged is the role of law. Yet people and organizations bring law in catastrophe and humanitarian gove…

A Brief Guide to Reading, Writing, and Giving Feedback in Socio-Legal Studies

By: Mark Fathi Massoud This piece first appeared in the Centre for Law and Society. LSR is grateful for the opportunity to reprint this post.


SCHOLARLY READING

Part of researching and writing well in the field of socio-legal studies is reading well. Reading well involves annotating everything that you read. Each article, book or book section that you read must be “imPECCable” –

P is for Purpose: Ask yourself, what is the author’s purpose in writing this piece? Who is the audience? This objective is usually stated almost immediately in a piece of writing, usually in a preface or abstract or introduction.

E is for Evidence: What evidence does the author marshal in support of his/her purpose?

C is for Conclusion: What does the author conclude in light of the evidence gathered?

C is for Critique: Ask yourself — given the author’s stated purpose, did the author achieve what the author set out to achieve? Assess the strengths and weaknesses of the author’s work. In what ways did the reading app…