GUIDELINES FOR AUTHORS
Articles should be written in a straightforward
style that is accessible to intelligent but general readers. Although the PT is
regularly visited by professional philosophers, many readers of the PT are
philosophy students or philosophically curious web surfers. To best serve these
latter users, authors should minimize unnecessary technical vocabulary.
The Chicago Manual of Style, 16th
- An abstract should be also submitted
(between 300-500 words), and you also have to give 5-7 keywords.
- Length should be between 6,000 -
- Please use the automatic footnote function.
Papers with footnotes inserted as normal text at the end of the document
will not be accepted.
- Authors who are non-native English speakers
have the responsibility to submit articles that do not read like broken
English, and that are stylistically intelligible to native English speakers.
Many of our foreign authors recruit English-speaking proofreaders before
submitting their articles. The editing process will proceed much more
quickly and easily if your papers are worked through by a native speaker
Publication Ethics and
Publication Malpractice Statement
The editor of the journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles
submitted to the journal should be published. Based on the review report of the
editors and referees, the editor can accept, reject, or request modifications to
the manuscript. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's
editorial board and the advice of other editors and reviewers of the journal,
and is constrained by legal requirements as shall then be in force.
An editor will at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual
content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief,
ethnic origin, citizenship, or political views of the authors.
The editor and any editorial staff shall not disclose any information about
a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers,
potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, as appropriate.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used
in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.
Guest editors must have at least a Ph.D. degree and keep the general deadlines
very strict (March 31st: Summer issue; September 30th: Winter issue).
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the
editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving
Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is
inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting
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.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential
documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as
authorized by the editor.
Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by
the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been
previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer
should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap
between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of
which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept
confidential and not used for personal advantage. 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 or
institutions connected to the papers.
To avoid plagiarism and misquotation, the authors should ensure that they
have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work
and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent
In case the paper overlaps significantly in content with a previous
publication by the same author, the editor of this journal has to agree to the
publication, permission must be obtained by the copyright holder of the original
source and the original source has to be acknowledged. Submitting the same
manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical
publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Acknowledgement of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors
should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of
the reported work.
Authorship of the Paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant
contribution to the preparation of the submitted article. The corresponding
author should ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final
version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other
substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the
results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support
for the project should be disclosed.
Underlying data to any quantitative statement should be represented
accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references
to permit others to replicate the work or check information. Fraudulent or
knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are
Fundamental errors in published works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own
published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal
editor and cooperate with the editor to prepare an erratum or addenda, and/or
retract the original publication.