Information for authors: Sociological and Political Studies. New Series

The journal Sociological and Political Studies. New Series accepts original texts exclusively; the submitted texts must not be under consideration for publication in any other journals or books.

The journal also publishes texts in English if they are written neatly and are evaluated positively in the usual qualification process. Both Polish and English texts may be rejected by the editorial team due to negligent language.

The articles should be submitted electronically as attachments in the MsWord standard (.doc or .docx) to the following e-mail address: socpol.redakcja@is.uw.edu.pl. The articles must have titles (Polish and English), an abstract in English (up to 150 words) as well as up to five keywords in Polish and English (singular nouns or multi-word terms).

The journal also accepts review essays and reviews; these can have a title. The editors do not return texts that had not been ordered. The submitted book reviews should cover publications that are not older than two years, counting from the planned date of publication of a given issue.

The abstract attached to the text should be prepared in the form of a continuous text and contain information about the theoretical background of the argument, its objectives, methods of analysis and the results of empirical research or conclusions of the analysis conducted, if the article is purely theoretical or review-based.

Technical requirements

The authors are kindly requested to comply with the following directives: size A4; font Times New Roman; line spacing 1,5; justified text, margins 25mm; pagination bottom right corner; continuous page numbering; the main title in bold and centred; other titles aligned to the left and in bold. New paragraphs should begin with an indentation.

Tables should be suitably numbered and titled, while graphs numbered and captioned. Pictures, maps, and charts can only be black and white. Tables, maps, and pictures should be appended on separate pages at the end of the text.

The texts should not be signed. The details of the author submitting the text (full name, academic title, affiliation, phone number, postal address, e-mail address) should be attached in a separate file so that anonymity can be ensured. One can also include information about their ORCID profile. Authors should avoid in-text information that could potentially facilitate their identification. References to their own works and publications should be made in third person or impersonally. In case of multi-authored articles we ask that the main author be indicated, with their surname being given as the first one. All authors are obliged to give their e-mail addresses as well as information regarding affiliations (name of the institution and its postal address). We also ask that valid mailing addresses of all authors of a given article be provided.

The submission of a text is tantamount to declaring that the article is an exclusive and original work of the author/s, and any participation of other people who contributed to the writing of the text has been noted, e.g. in a footnote or acknowledgment that would state the character of help obtained (sharing data, devising analytical methods, methodological consultation, etc.)

The process of reviewing and qualifying texts for printing

Each submitted article goes through double blind peer review; the reviewers do not get to know the identity of the author. Reviews are prepared according to a form uniform for all submitted articles and essays, which is sent to the reviewer along with the text (review form template). Book reviews and other non-scientific texts are reviewed by members of the Editorial Board and Team. The author receives the reviews along with the editors’ decision with regard to the publication of the text. The article can be accepted, accepted conditionally (after the changes suggested by the editors are introduced), or rejected without a possibility of revising and resubmitting. The authors should introduce the suggested changes by the deadline imposed by the editors. When submitting the new version of the article, the authors are also asked to attach a short response to the reviewers’ comments.

The authors have the right to appeal against the editors’ decision if the decision was to reject the work based on the received reviews. All the appeals must be submitted in writing to the editorial office within two weeks, counting from the day of being notified of the rejection. The appeal should contain arguments for publishing the submitted article. Based on the developed arguments, the editors will either uphold the previous decision or ask for the article to be re-evaluated by new reviewers.

The journal does not charge fees for publications. All published articles are freely available on the website of the journal six months after the publication of a given issue.

The process of reviewing submitted articles

  1. Formal assessment of the article: the editorial secretary checks the technical correctness and the completeness of the submitted material (including the quality of displaying possible illustrations, tables and special characters as well as the presence of elements such as the abstract, keywords, etc.)
  2. The article is first assessed by the editor-in-chief and the editors of the thematic issue for which the article has been submitted. At this stage the article is evaluated with regard to the criterion of the originality of the text. If there are breaches of ethics connected with the publication of academic texts, the editors reserve the right to reject the article and report the case to the institution with which the author is affiliated. The article is also assessed with regard to the compliance with the overall profile of the journal and the thematics of the particular issue for which the text has been submitted.
  3. After the initial acceptance, the article is subjected to anonymisation (contents of the file and the metadata) and then referred to reviewers outside the editorial team. At this stage each submitted article is evaluated by two experts. The following assessment criteria are applied: clarity of the intended objective, originality of research, theoretical background, quality of empirical research, originality of conclusions, significance and relevance to the research area consistent with the profile of the journal, quality of language, intelligibility, punctuation, and selection of sources relevant to the intended objective of the article. If a reviewer finds that they recognise the author of the article or that they are not qualified to evaluate the text properly, they relay this information to the editors, who then refer the article to another reviewer.
  4. The authors are given the contents of the reviews and the decision made by the editorial team. If the printing of the article first requires the introduction of changes and corrections, the author/s is/are given the chance to adjust the text (in conformity to the reviewers’ suggestions) and respond to the reviewers’ comments.
  5. The adjusted article is re-evaluated by the editors of the issue and, if need be, referred to the same reviewers for another evaluation. Based on their assessment, the editors reach a final decision with regard to publication.
  6. When the text qualifies for printing, the publishing partner enters into a publishing agreement with the Author; the Author grants the publishing house a royalty-free licence (sample license agreement). Authors are not given remuneration or compensation for the published texts.

Suggested bibliography system is the Chicago Manual of Style

Szczepański, Jan. Elementarne pojęcia socjologii. Warszawa: PWN, 1969.

Wejland, Andrzej Paweł. “Ukryte porównania.” In Studia Socjologiczne, no. 1–2 (1991): 9-108.

Kymlicka, Will. Multicultural Citizenship. A Liberal Theory of Minority Rights. Oxford–New York: Clarendon Press–Oxford University Press, 1995.

Gutmann, Amy, and Dennis Thompson. Why Deliberative Democracy? Princeton, NJ–Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2004.

Stokes, Susan Carol. “Pathologies of deliberation.” In Deliberative Democracy, edited by Jon Elster. Cambridge, UK–New York: Cambridge University Press, 1998.

Shapiro, Ian. Stan teorii demokracji. Translated by Izabela Kisilowska. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, 2006.

Shklar, Judith Nisse. “The Sources of Social Power: A History of Power from the Beginning to A.D. 1760” by Michael Mann (review.) In The Journal of Interdisciplinary History 18, no. 2 (1987): 331-332.

With this bibliography system, in-text citations should take one of the two following forms:

… (Szczepański 1969: 31)

or

According to Jan Szczepański (1969: 31), …

If there are footnotes in the text, they should be rare, short, and placed at the bottom of a page.