Logique et Analyse

Home Special issues Contact

Submissions

Submission preparation

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 submission is within the scope of the journal.
  • The submission file is a pdf-file.
  • The following minimal formatting requirements are met:
    • The manuscript has a title.
    • The manuscript has an abstract.
    • The pages are numbered.
    • The bibliography appears at the end of the manuscript.
  • If submitting a manuscript for double-blind review, do make sure that identifying information was removed from the manuscript itself as well as from the document properties.

How to submit a manuscript

If you would like to submit a manuscript for consideration, please go to the journal management site.

Review procedure

Following an initial vetting by the editorial board, each submission is evaluated by one or two external referees. Depending on whether the author identity is clear from the manuscript, a double-blind or single blind peer review procedure will be followed.

Review procedure: Double-blind

  • Identity transparency: Double anonymized: Reviewer identity is not made visible to author, author identity is not made visible to reviewer, reviewer and author identity is visible to (decision-making) editor
  • Reviewer interacts with: Editor: Communication between editor and reviewer (traditional model). Also known as 'independent review'. Identities can be anonymized or visible.
  • Review information published: None.

Review procedure: Single-blind

  • Identity transparency: Single anonymized: Reviewer identity is not made visible to author, author identity is visible to reviewer, reviewer and author identity is visible to (decision-making) editor
  • Reviewer interacts with: Editor: Communication between editor and reviewer (traditional model). Also known as 'independent review'. Identities can be anonymized or visible.
  • Review information published: None.

(We use the terminology of the NISO/STM's Working Group on Peer Review Terminology.)

Publication preparation

  • If the submission is accepted for publication, the author or authors have to send the source file to the editors via e-mail.
  • If the source file is a TeX-file, then the authors have to use the LaTeX template.
  • If the double-blind peer review procedure was followed, the author or authors have to add their name(s), affiliation(s) and e-mail address (of the corresponding author).

Open archiving

  • Authors are permitted to deposit digital copies of the accepted versions of their manuscripts or postprints (namely the versions of the manuscript after peer review but without editorial typesetting) in institutional and subject repositories, e.g. PhilArchive or PhilSci Archive, which make the archival copies freely and permanently available to the public.
  • There is no embargo period for the accepted versions.