Login or Register to make a submission.

Submission Preparation Checklist

As part of the submission process, authors are required to check off their submission's compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.
  • The submission has not been previously published, nor is it before another journal for consideration (or an explanation has been provided in Comments to the Editor).
  • The article, or any part thereof, is in no way a violation of any existing original or derivative copyright.
  • The submission file is in Word (.doc) or RTF (.rtf) document file format.
  • Where available, URLs for the references have been provided.
  • The text is single-spaced; uses a 12-point font; employs italics, rather than underlining (except with URL addresses).
  • All URL addresses in the text (e.g., PIR) are activated and ready to click.
  • The text adheres to the formatting requirements outlined in the Author Guidelines, which is found in About the Journal.
  • Read the journal's Publication Agreement and Copyright License.

Author Guidelines

Stylesheet for Contributors

A. Content

Five Kinds of Reviewer

(adapted by Roger Shiner from Susan Swan, 'Nine ways of looking at a critic', Toronto Globe and Mail 30th November 1996. E23)

  1. The Spankers are out to administer discipline over anything from ill-conceived plot-lines to misplaced commas.
  2. The Young (and Old) Turk sees the review solely as an opportunity to demonstrate her or his own intellectual superiority and above-average intelligence.
  3. The Self-Abusers feel they could have written a better book on the subject, given half the chance, and describe it at great length.
  4. Gushers skip over discussion of the book; they just want to communicate the enjoyment of reading it.
  5. The Good Reviewer will represent the book (without lapsing into long-winded summaries) so the reader gets a sense of what the book is like whether the reviewer likes it or not. The good reviewer will also offer an interesting or revealing point of view from which the book can be perceived critically.

B. Length and Deadlines

We kindly request that all contributors adhere to a word limit of 1500 words. This ensures fairness among all contributors. If a submission exceeds this limit, it will be returned for further editing. Please note that a slight deviation from the limit (e.g., 1534 words) is acceptable, but a significant deviation (e.g., 1704 words) is not.

As for the submission deadline, we offer a degree of flexibility. We publish reviews on a rolling basis, meaning that early submissions are likely to be published sooner. However, to maintain our credibility, we cannot publish many outdated reviews. Therefore, we may reject reviews that are significantly delayed.

C. Heading

Please single-space the heading, using the following format and punctuation:

  • John Doe, Making Sense. University of Alberta Press 1997. 227 pp. $44.99 (Hardback ISBN 0123456789); $20.99 (Paperback ISBN 0123456023)

Note: bold face for author, and italics for title. If you don't have pricing information, please leave space for us to fill it in.

With multiple authors, put the names in bold face, and 'and' in normal, type. If there are editors(s), abbreviate as 'ed.' or 'eds.' e.g., John Doe, ed. or John Doe and Heidegger Jones, eds. Painting the Sky.

If you are reviewing a translation, use the format:

  • Robert Burch, Confessions of a Technophobe. Trans. Joe Ubersetzung.

If there are both hardback and paperback editions, use the following format: [space for price (Hardback ISBN 0123456789); [space for price] (paperback ISBN 9780123456789).

Spell out 'U.P.' etc. in full.

State the name of the press, e.g.: University of Virginia Press 

D. Layout

  • Put page references inside parentheses as plain figures; put them inside final punctuation; use 'p.' only when it is part of the normal grammar of a sentence. So:
  • Blogg says on p.21 or Blogg says (21) ...  or ... as Blogg says (21), ...
  • Please use the reduced form for reference: e.g. 239-67 not 239-267, 235-9 not 235-39; but 112-17 - leave the 1 in for teens.
  • Always use single quotes; use double quotes only for quotes within quotes.
  • Normally, when quoting the book reviewed, put closing commas and periods inside any quote-marks. Otherwise, put punctuation outside quote marks, including the case where a page reference follows a quotation. Punctuation always goes outside the titles of parts, sections or chapters.
  • So ' ... an invalid argument.' But ' ... an invalid argument' (21).
  • For omissions in quotes, use space / three adjacent dots / space as in this sheet... .
  • Put your own name and affiliation in caps & lower-case on the left of the page at the end of the review. Non-affiliated persons may put whatever they like.

E. Style

Please note that any reviews submitted without proper references will be returned to the author, as we do not have the capacity to search for missing references.

We kindly request that contributors minimize the use of indented quotations/block quotes. Even a quotation spanning 6-8 typescript lines can be seamlessly integrated into the main body of the text. This helps maintain a consistent and clean layout for the content.

We do not permit the use of footnotes and lists of sources at the end of the review. We will not include a bibliography. Instead, all necessary citations should be included directly within the text using parentheses. This approach ensures a clean and uninterrupted flow of content, with all relevant sources acknowledged directly within the text.

It is recommended that contributors refer to authors by their unadorned surname (for example, ‘Wisdom’) whenever possible. If appropriate, abbreviations such as ‘W’ are acceptable. Please avoid using the expression ‘the author’ unless the context absolutely requires it.

We kindly ask contributors to refrain from using third-person references such as ‘This reviewer thinks…’. Instead of using phrases like ‘In my opinion, the book was excellent’, you could simply state ‘The book was excellent’. This saves you four words and makes your argument more direct.

F. Revisions to Submissions

The editors will proof every review and may make small changes for reasons of clarity or to correct typos. Authors of reviews will only be consulted about these changes if the editors believe that they are major or if they are uncertain whether they capture authors' intended meaning.

Philosophy in Review Publication Agreement and Copyright License

Privacy Statement

The names and email addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.