Please review both the APSA Style Manual for Political Science and the guidelines outlined below (including the FAQs) before submitting your manuscript.
Scope and Aims
PS: Political Science & Politics is a premier outlet featuring timely and original research on a variety of topics that are relevant to political scientists and researchers in allied fields. We encourage submissions regarding research on political science pedagogy, political events in the US and abroad, and research on the state of our discipline, including survey research on political scientists. PS welcomes work authored by and reflecting the research priorities of underrepresented groups, those working outside the academy, and scholars residing outside the United States.
PS: Political Science & Politics accepts four kinds of submissions:
- Original research articles 4,000 words or fewer (relating to Politics, The Profession, or The Teacher. PS’s Politics section includes evidence-based research on contemporary political issues around the world. PS’s The Profession section includes evidence-based research relating to the political science discipline. PS’s The Teacher section includes systematic and evidence-based assessments of new, creative, or experimental teaching tools and strategies to improve classroom and co-curricular learning experiences for teaching political science);
- Symposias featuring a group of five to seven research contributions on a specified topic (3,000 words or fewer each). The hopeful Guest Editor first submits a symposium proposal to Editorial Manager to determine whether the symposium will be accepted.
- Spotlights featuring five to ten short, timely research contributions on a specified topic (1,500 words or fewer each). The hopeful Guest Editor first submits a spotlight proposal to Editorial Manager to determine whether the symposium will be accepted.
- Comment and Controversy submissions, which are original research articles that comment on, extend, methodologically assess, or correct published work. These manuscripts must be 3000 words or fewer, provide new evidence or analysis that substantially changes the conclusions or interpretations of the published work, and communicate these findings in a collegial and respectful manner.
Please see our FAQs and Guidelines for Proposals for more information on these types of submissions.
Upon submission, an article may be desk rejected by the editors of PS or sent out for review under a double-blind review process. (Note: if a reviewer reveals themself to the author in their review, the reviewer's name will be removed from the review.) If the editors (in accordance with reviewer recommendations) believe that the article would benefit from revision, the author(s) will receive a letter from the editors asking the author to revise the article as outlined by the reviewers and to resubmit it for further review by the editors and reviewers. The deadline for submitting a revision is included in the decision letter and depends on the extent of the revisions requested. Revised and resubmitted articles more than six months old will not be considered for publication in PS.
Upon acceptance, authors are asked to submit a revised, unblinded, final copy of the manuscript in Microsoft Word (no other formats are permitted) directly to the managing editor. The final version is copy-edited and returned to the author for final approval. All changes and revisions are incorporated into the manuscript electronically and submitted to the compositor to create proofs. A digitally-signed "License to Publish" form from the author will be requested before proof/production. Note: if you are seeking to convert your LaTeX submission to Word, please write the LaTeX document to a PDF and then use Adobe Acrobat to convert this to a Word document. Usually, that suffices. If not, the Pandoc package may also be useful to convert LaTeX to Word.
One set of page proofs is sent to the author. Corrected page proofs should be returned to the managing editor within two (2) business days of receipt of the proofs. Every effort should be made to limit corrections to typographical errors. Fees charged for other changes will be the responsibility of the author.
Out of respect for the journal and the profession writ large, the editorial team of PS requests authors with manuscripts under review or published articles agree to future invitations to review manuscripts for the journal.
Research Ethics and Transparency
PS takes its role as a space for scholarly communication within the political science community very seriously. Such scholarly communication entails clear and transparent sharing of our research across disciplinary subfields and epistemological and methodological approaches. This, in turn, requires clear and transparent communication about the procedures that we use to collect our evidence and to ensure that our research practices are ethical. While epistemological and methodological diversity is a strength of the political science community, this diversity also makes more imperative scholarly communication that is as transparent and accessible as possible across disciplinary subfields and approaches. Consequently, PS expects all authors to comply with ethical and transparency obligations described in APSA's A Guide to Professional Ethics in Political Science (2012) and in Principles and Guidance for Human Subjects Research (approved by the APSA Council, April 4, 2020).
Researchers have ethical obligations to:
▪ ensure that research that directly engages human participants in the research process adheres to APSA’s Principles and Guidance for Human Subjects Research, and, if it does not for well-founded reasons, provide reasoned justification in scholarly publications and presentations (APSA 2012, 9);
▪ declare what compensation was paid (if any) to human participants and how the amount was determined;
▪ declare any potential or perceived conflicts of interest arising from their research (APSA 2012, 9);
▪ disclose sources of financial support for their research (APSA 2012, 9);
▪ “facilitate the evaluation of their evidence-based knowledge claims through data access, production transparency, and analytic transparency so that their work can be tested or replicated” (APSA 2012, 9) whenever legally, ethically and epistemologically possible; and
▪ acknowledge contributions to the research, including authorship and citations to previous work, as appropriate (APSA 2012, 9, 11).
To ensure that research published in the PS is consistent with these principles, when submitting their research for publication in PS, all authors will be expected to explicitly affirm the ways in which their research practices conform to these standards.
In particular, submitting authors will be asked:
▪ if the research draws on research directly engaging human participants, including human subjects, expert interviewees, and those exposed to experimental interventions, should answer "yes" to the screening question (even if ruled exempt from further review by the relevant ethics review board),
▪ discuss in the text or an appendix their ethical practices concerning human participants, particularly those included in the Principles such as consent, deception, confidentiality, harm and impact, as well as whether and how participants were compensated
▪ confirm compliance with APSA’s Principles and Guidance for Human Subjects Research, or if it is not in compliance, provide reasoned justification in the main text, with additional explanation provided in an appendix (included at the time of submission) if needed;
▪ adhere to the other ethical principles listed above, including explaining how any other real or perceived ethical issues or conflicts of interest, were addressed, including where these issues are discussed in the manuscript or an appendix as needed;
▪ declare any agencies, organizations, or institutions that funded the research;
▪ indicate where in the manuscript or an appendix the data collection procedures (if relevant) are explained; and
▪ confirm that, if the paper is accepted, quantitative data and related code necessary to produce the results will be made publicly available on the PS Dataverse, or in cases where such confirmation is not possible, provide a reasoned justification in the text or an appendix concerning the legal, ethical, or methodological constraints that prevent public, free access to the data.
This information (including any appendix that provides further details) will be shared with reviewers as appropriate, who will be invited to comment upon the extent to which the research or researchers have adequately addressed ethical and transparency obligations.
Upon conditional acceptance for publication in the PS, authors (particularly those whose work directly engages human participants in the research process) will be expected to:
▪ affirm a set of ethical and/or transparency declarations related to these principles;
▪ submit an appendix that explains any exceptions or issues related to the above principles, revised if relevant in light of comments from reviewers and editors, including relevant additional documents, such as but not limited to
▪ ethics certificates or approvals from all organizations that approved the research and/or
▪ other research documentation, such as survey instruments, interview guides, or other codebooks; and
▪ for quantitative research, prepare and deposit in the PS Dataverse the datasets and code necessary to reproduce all results described in the text and any appendix, including in-text references to tests or statistics, tables, figures, or other illustrations, unless legal, ethical or methodological constraints prevent such data sharing.
The corresponding author will be responsible for preparing these materials and submitting them for archiving in the PS Dataverse (explained further below).
Authors of empirical papers will be required to submit files for replication purposes to https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataverse/ps/ prior to the publication of manuscripts. These replication files must reproduce the findings in the manuscript with limited intervention by the end user. Someone accessing these files should be able to open the replication script in the program that you used, run the script without modification, and produce your results. Any add-on software libraries or packages (e.g., user-installed libraries for R or Stata) that are required to reproduce the manuscript’s results must be clearly indicated in a README file and/or referenced in the replication code, including instructions about how to obtain this software.Failure to adhere to these guidelines, unless explicitly agreed to by the editorial team, will result in a withdrawal of acceptance. If you believe you cannot comply with the data policy, clearly indicate your request for an exemption in your cover letter upon submissions. Note that exemption requests will be handled on a case-by-case basis at the discretion of the editorial team.
Authors should upload to Dataverse:
1. The data set(s) that formed the basis of the research
2. Well documented code that will produce results from the article and online appendices (placed in the order that the results appear in the manuscript)
3. A log or results file that displays the results produced by running the code
4. A README file that includes descriptions of the other files, any variables used in the analysis and a description of intermediate data sets or programs used to create the final results. The data files and code can be provided in any format using any statistical package or software. The README file must include a list of add-on libraries or packages that are necessary to execute the code and how these libraries/packages can be obtained.
There may be occasions when the author is unable to comply due to data embargoes or privacy concerns. These cases will be handled individually and the rationale for the inability to provide the replication files must be included in the cover letter at the time of submission. We recognize that it may be necessary to de-identify some datasets by removing some demographic and other indicators. Authors are asked to provide information on how proprietary data can be obtained by others in their README file. In all cases, a copy of the code used to create the final results is still required. To encourage qualitative scholars to make their research transparent and accessible, we request authors to archive relevant evidence and research protocols where possible. The editors recognize reproduction standards in qualitative research are under discussion, and authors who are unsure about the nature of the evidence required can contact the editors for clarification. Appropriate embargo periods for both quantitative and qualitative research materials will be negotiated with authors where reasons for embargo are consistent with existing guidelines. The data should be referenced using the DOI (from Dataverse) in the references section of the manuscript and should be cited in the text. For additional instructions on how to upload a dataset, see PS Dataverse instructions.
Manuscripts should be submitted electronically at www.editorialmanager.com/ps. Please send questions or concerns to email@example.com.
When submitting a manuscript through the online Editorial Manager system, the authors should have the following information available:
● three keywords that describe the manuscript;
● a cover letter available to upload
● an abstract of no more than 150 words; an abstract is required for all article types upon submission, however only articles (not symposia or spotlights) are published with their abstracts
● the number of words in the manuscript (not to exceed 4,000 words for articles, 3,000 for symposia, and 1,500 for spotlights);
● the number of figures and tables; and
● a blinded manuscript in Microsoft Word
Keywords and classifications describe the content of your manuscript. The keywords should designate which subfield(s) of political science your work falls into, as well as any particular aspects of your submission. The classifications indicate areas of research specialization. These terms are standard among the APSA and its journals. After you have made the classification selections, choose the Next button to continue. Blinding your manuscript is required.
In Editorial Manager, when answering the question about a paper's anonymity, consider the following to avoid your submission being returned to you prior to review:
● Do your names appear on the title page or in the header or footer areas? If so, remove them before submitting the paper.
● Does the paper refer to your previous work in the text of the manuscript using phrases such as "in my earlier work (Smith 2004)," or "in our 2003 article on ... we"? Revise these. Such self-references do not comply with the double-blind peer-review process.
● Have acknowledgements been included with the version submitted for review that indicate specific grant numbers, your conference presentations, or other easily recognized background details that would reveal your identity to the reviewers?
As part of the submission process, you may suggest two reviewers to review your work. You should name potential reviewers who possess a particular expertise to assess the submission. You also have the option to note any opposed reviewers upon submission. After uploading your manuscript, view and approve the system-generated PDF before logging out of the system. You will receive a confirmation email upon successfully submitting your manuscript.
Manuscript Preparation and Formatting
Authors should follow the manuscript preparation guidelines below. Any submission that does not follow them will be sent back to the authors, delaying the review process.
- Maximum 4,000 (article); 3,000 (symposium); 1,500 (spotlight); 3,000 (Comment and Controversy)
▪ The word count for each of these submissions is all inclusive of the title, abstract, article, tables, figures, footnotes, and references. It does not include the separately uploaded appendix/supplementary material. Thus, the entire manuscript Word document should adhere to the respective word limits.
▪ Manuscripts should be double-spaced and formatted for 8 1/2" x 11" paper
▪ 12 point font
▪ Page numbers are required on all pages.
▪ Manuscripts should include in-text citations that will correspond with endnotes and references. Endnotes and references should conform to the Style Manual and the Chicago Manual of Style, 17th edition
▪ Do not use acronyms or computational abbreviations when discussing variables.
Figures and Tables
▪ Please place figures and tables exactly where should appear in the manuscript or use the placeholder “” and then include the figure on the next page.
▪ Please number figures and tables in consecutive order.
▪ Please provide adequate explanation for variables that appear in the tables and figures.
Charges apply for all color figures that appear in the print version of the journal. At the time of submission, contributors should clearly state whether their figures should appear in color in the online version only, or whether they should appear in color both online and in the print version. There is no charge for including color figures in the online version of the journal but it must be clear that color is needed to enhance the meaning of the figure, rather than simply being for aesthetic purposes. If you request color figures in the printed version, you will be contacted by CCC-Rightslink who are acting on our behalf to collect Author Charges. Please follow their instructions to avoid any delay in the publication of your article. Note: other requirements for table and figures regarding resolution and formats will be provided should your manuscript be accepted for publication.
▪ Author-Date system of the 17th Edition of the Chicago Manual of Style
▪ Information can be found in Chapter 15, Documentation II: Author-Date References
▪ Click here for access to the Chicago-Style Citation Quick Guide. Please be sure to change to Author-Date
▪ See below for a basic reference list example.
▪ Please include a link to all non-published work, i.e. working papers, conference papers, etc.
▪ Publication information for each reference must be complete and correct at time of submission.
▪ Use the Author-Date system in the following format: (Author Year, Pages). Note there is no comma between the author and the year. Separate mass citations with a semicolon.
▪ Do not redact your self-citations.
▪ Do not use footnotes for simple citations.
“In the book by Ahlquist and Levi (2013), …”
Or at the end of a sentence (Mansbridge 1986).
Citations may appear at the end of each (in-)dependent clause.
▪ Figures and Tables appearing in the appendices should be lettered to distinguish them from those in the manuscript (Table A.1, A.2, Figures A.1, A.2 etc)
▪ Each appendix should have a descriptive title.
▪ Appendices must be submitted as a separate appendix document.
Beginning January 1, 2019, an ORCID iD is a requirement for corresponding authors submitting to PS. The Editorial Manager system will prompt authors to attach an ORCID iD to their manuscript during the submission process. Authors can also choose to update their Editorial Manager profile with their ORCID iD in advance to save themselves time during the submission process. Including an ORCID iD with your article submission improves the discoverability of your work and creates more opportunity for recognition. By using your iD you can also benefit from having your ORCID record automatically updated when your article is published. ORCID deposits your iD to Crossref and, provided you have given them permission to do so, they'll update your record automatically each time you publish an article. Learn more about ORCID and Crossref’s automatic update functionality.
Do not hesitate, in any cases of doubt, to consult the PS Editorial Offices with more specific questions by sending an e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Please consult our Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) for further information.