Second language abstracts, translated articles and book reviews will not be subject to double-anonymous peer review and will be reviewed by the editorial team.

Editorial Conflict of Interest Policy

In addition to Cambridge University Press’ guidance on ethics in publishing, the editors of the Law & Society Review seek to avoid any conflicts of interest with respect to the evaluation of manuscripts by close associates of themselves or members of the entire editorial team. A manuscript should not be advantaged or disadvantaged by an author’s relationship with the editor(s) or editorial staff members handling the paper. The manuscript should also not be advantaged or disadvantaged by an author’s current or prior service as a member of the editorial team. When an author of a manuscript is a former or current graduate student, advisor, colleague, or co-author of the co-editor-in-chief or associate editor who would normally handle the submission, another co-editor/associate editor will handle the paper’s evaluation. If all three co-editors face conflicts (e.g., for a submission from an author at their home institution), they will ask an associate editor to act as the paper’s editor through the peer review process and evaluation. If a current member of the editorial team (editorial assistant, managing editor, associate editor) submits a manuscript, the co-editors-in-chief will convene an ad hoc editorial team consisting of former editors-in-chief with arm’s length distance (i.e., no prior concurrent service) with the author. Other circumstances that might lead to recusal are a close personal relationship with the author (not covered by the list above) or a submission that is directly and critically engaged with an editor’s own research. 

When an article is published for which the author has a conflict as described above, it will include an initial footnote reading, “The editorial handling and assessment of this article was conducted under a surrogate editors, given potential conflicts of interest among members of the editorial team and the author.”

This conflict policy draws on the language and principles from similar policies of other interdisciplinary journals.

Appeals

Appeals of editorial decisions will only be considered if they refer to a specific manuscript and must be based on evidence that either (1) an editor or reviewer made a significant factual error/a major misunderstanding of a manuscript, or (2) the integrity of the editorial decision making process was compromised.  In general, only one appeal per manuscript per decision stage will be considered. 

To appeal an editorial decision, contact the Editors-in-Chief and specify the reason for your appeal. Your appeal will be reviewed and the final decision regarding your appeal will rest with the Editors-in-Chief. New submissions take priority over appeals, so it may take a substantial period of time for the journal to reach a conclusion about your appeal.