FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

What is the Public Philosophy Journal?

The Public Philosophy Journal (PPJ) is an open forum for the curation and creation of accessible scholarship that deepens our understanding of, deliberation about, and action concerning issues of public relevance. The PPJ has adopted an innovative Formative Peer Review process designed to enable colleagues engaged with questions of public concern to create scholarship that is accessible to, relevant for, and shaped by the public. For more about the PPJ, please visit our About Us pages.

 

 

Do you ever recruit new people for your Editorial Advisory Board?

Yes. Please email our Editor-in-Chief, Christopher P. Long, to express interest: cplong@msu.edu.

 

 

I have an idea for a special issue. Who do I talk to?

Great! Please email publicphilosophyjournal@gmail.com to discuss your idea.

 

 

Isn’t it less rigorous to allow all reviewers and composers to know each other's names during peer review?

No. In fact, we find that being identifiable increases the rigor of the review because people’s reputations are on the line. Any conflicts of interest are expressed openly, so we don’t have to guess where bias might be hiding. Moreover, by requiring the piece to improve before being considered for publication in the Journal, we raise the quality of all pieces under consideration.

 

 

What license(s) cover original work I find on the Current or the Journal?

Please see our Terms and Permissions page. Please contact publicphilosophyjournal@gmail.com with any remaining questions.

 

 

What is PPJ's involvement in endeavors other than the website?

We maintain a Twitter account (@PubPhilJ) to raise awareness and encourage discussion of philosophical issues in specific communities and in society at large. We attend and present at the annual Public Philosophy Network conference. We promote digital humanities and open scholarship by partnering with other like-minded organizations. For instance, from 2020-2022, our technology developers are designing a new Collaborative Community Review application that will interface with other apps in the digital scholarship ecosystem (e.g., Manifold and Humanities Commons).

 

 

I have a publishing or public philosophy question that isn’t answered here. Who can I contact?

Please email publicphilosophyjournal@gmail.com.

Who can submit original work to the PPJ? Who is likely to be published in the Journal?

Anyone can submit original work to the PPJ. All composers are equally likely to be published regardless of where they work or what level of education they have. The likelihood of being published is tied only to how well your piece meets our four style criteria.

 

Why should I consider submitting my original work to the PPJ?

There are many reasons submitting to the PPJ might be a good idea for you. Perhaps you want to:

  • Support the mission of the PPJ
  • Publish your research in an accessible, peer-reviewed journal
  • Contribute to the conversation about public philosophy
  • Raise a philosophical issue that has been overlooked but has strong implications for particular communities
  • Share your scholarly research with a public audience
  • Get helpful feedback to develop your ideas or work
  • Share your multimedia work without having to limit it to text
  • Experience a friendly, generous review
    •  

What is the expected review timeline?

Every review will take different amounts of time depending on participant availability and the status of the piece. However, an average timeline is 1 month to conduct the review, 4-10 weeks to review a piece from submission to decision. The total timeline will depend on how many rounds of FPR are needed. Reviews will go faster if composers nominate an appropriate reviewer and if all parties remain responsive.

 

 

What rights will I have to my original work once it is submitted to the PPJ?

Please see our Terms and Permissions page. Please contact publicphilosophyjournal@gmail.com with any remaining questions.

 

What is “Formative Peer Review” and how is it different from other kinds of review I’m used to at different journals and magazines?

Please see our Formative Peer Review page.

 

 

What are the PPJ editors looking for in a piece?

To be published in our peer-reviewed journal, pieces must exemplify our 4 style criteria. Please see our Submissions Guidelines page  and Our Vision page for more information.

 

 

What kinds of original work does the PPJ accept for Formative Peer Review?

Please see our Submissions Guidelines page.

 

 

How do I submit my work to the PPJ?

Please complete our Submission Form. Further instructions are available on our Submissions Guidelines page. If you have trouble with the form or additional questions arise, please contact us at publicphilosophyjournal@gmail.com

 

 

Are there size or length limits on submissions?

Yes, please see our Submission Guidelines page.

 

 

What information will I need to submit to the PPJ along with my original work?

You will need the following:

  1. Title for the piece
  2. Subtitle (optional)
  3. All Composer’s Names. All must be registered on the PPJ site first.
  4. Brief abstract or description
  5. Name(s) of composers holding copyright
  6. Year of submission
  7. A brief description of the piece’s stage of development
  8. A brief description of what kind of feedback you need from your reviewers
  9. A brief Community Ethics Statement
    1.  

What citation style should I use?

Please see our Submission Guidelines page.

 

 

May I submit my piece elsewhere while it’s undergoing FPR?

No. To respect the time and effort your Review Team is donating to your work, while your piece is undergoing FPR with us, please do not submit your work for publication elsewhere. You may, however, submit the piece elsewhere if the review process does not result in publication in our journal.

 

 

How will I know when my piece is officially published at the PPJ?

Prior to the official publication of your piece, editors will e-mail you to announce that your piece has been accepted for publication in our journal. This email will also request that you review copyedited proofs. When your work is published in the peer-reviewed journal, it can be accessed in the online journal archive.

 

 

How long may I take to revise my piece?

Your revision timeline will be determined in an email conversation between you, your Review Coordinator, and the PPJ Editors, but the average timeline is 1 month. Special issues have more rigid deadlines than regular issues.

 

 

How should I accommodate feedback from my reviewers?

You should consider the merit of each comment and respond as you deem appropriate: thank the reviewer for their compliment, revise according to the suggestion, respectfully explain why you are not accepting the suggestion, or ask for clarification on the suggestion. You may include such responses in an email to your Review Team or inside your review document.

What is “Formative Peer Review” and how is it different from other kinds of review I’m used to at different journals and magazines?

Please see our Formative Peer Review page.

 

What will I get out of being a reviewer for the PPJ?

There are many benefits to being a Formative Peer Reviewer for the PPJ. As a PPJ reviewer, you will:

  • Dramatically shape the scholarship—more than you would with traditional review,
  • Receive guidance on how to give helpful, generous reviews
  • Be able to request a Letter of Confirmation from the editors about your service as a reviewer
  • Have the opportunity for a “mini-publication” by submitting a Public Holistic Response that will be considered for publication alongside the piece you’re reviewing
  • Meet new colleagues through your Review Team!
  •  

Is FPR more work for me than other kinds of review?

The relative amount of work depends on how you conduct your other reviews and how you engage in your Formative Peer Review experiences. You are only required to give in-line comments and a Private Holistic Response that summarizes your suggestions for the composer. This makes one round of FPR usually less work than other forms of review. However, you might find FPR to be more work as you are asked to continue engaging in this form of feedback for each round of revisions until the editors decide whether or not the piece is accepted by the journal, or the composer withdraws the piece. To recognize this depth of commitment, we offer Letters of Confirmation for composers and reviewers to use in job applications and reviews. Please contact publicphilosophyjournal@gmail.com to request such a letter.

 

Can I remain anonymous as a reviewer?

No. Remaining identifiable is necessary both for the mission of the PPJ and the technical details of how our platform works.

 

How do I complete my review?

Please follow instructions from your Review Coordinator (RC). In general, the process is as follows:

  1. Access the article under review in Google Documents.
  2. Read the pop-up reviewer instructions carefully.
  3. Review the composer’s notes about what stage of development the piece is in, what kind of feedback they need from you, and their Community Ethics statement.
  4. Complete your review by leaving in-line comments keyed to our 4 style criteria. You may also include a Private Holistic Response at the bottom of the review page, or you can wait to provide this response until the composer has made revisions. You may leave and come back to finish your review later.
      1.  

You are encouraged to correspond with the composer, other reviewers, and RC directly throughout all rounds of FPR. You may correspond via email or within the document under review. You can even ask your RC to set up a video call with the review team to further your discussion of the piece.

      1.  

How do I see what kind of feedback the composer is asking from me?

The first page in the Google Document used for the review should include a table that presents the composer's responses to our feedback prompts. Please contact your Review Coordinator if the responses are not there or are inaccessible.

 

How do I see the composer’s Community Ethics Statement?

The first page in the Google Document used for the review should include a table that presents the composer's responses to our feedback prompts. Please contact your Review Coordinator if the responses are not there or are inaccessible.

 

Where do I leave my overall comments for the composer?

There are three open-ended text fields at the bottom of the review document. The Private Holistic Response field and the Comments Forum are to only be accessed by the Review Team. The Public Holistic Response will become public later, but only after your Review Coordinator communicates with you about it.

 

Can I edit my Public Holistic Response after I submit it during an early round of review? Can I wait to submit my Public Holistic Response until the final piece has been accepted to the Journal?

Yes, to both questions. You may submit a new or edited version of your Public Holistic Response to your Review Coordinator by email until first proofs of the original piece have been created. The Review Coordinator will make sure the production team gets your file.

css.php