Dialogue and Universalism publishes only monothematic issues. However, apart from a thematic collection of papers many Dialogue and Universalism issues include a separate group of articles on various themes, freely proposed by their authors. Therefore submissions on every topic which fits the journal scope and aims are welcome.
Manuscripts submitted to monothematic issues should adhere to the Dialogue and Universalism qualification standards. Among others all the contributions go through the double-blind reviewing process. Guest editors are expected to actively encourage prospective authors of the issue. This among others includes inviting competent scholars to submit to the issue. Guest-editors are responsible for ensuring a successful completion of the thematic issue, and for writing an editorial.
The prospective guest-editors of thematic issues are welcome to submit proposals to the Dialogue and Universalism editor-in-chief, outlining the topic for the proposed thematic issue, the importance of the topic, and its preliminary table of contents (Authors’ names, titles of papers).
Information for Authors
No fees are required from the Authors for manuscript processing and publishing submissions in the journal.
We follow the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. Addendum: “Editorial decisions should not be affected by the origins of the manuscript, including the nationality, ethnicity, political beliefs, race, or religion of the authors. Decisions to edit and publish should not be determined by the policies of governments or other agencies outside of the journal itself” (publicationethics.org, July 2013).
Manuscripts (in English) may be considered for Dialogue and Universalism if they have not been previously published.
We publish studies, essays, also books reviews, and discussion notes.
Manuscripts should be double-spaced, include an abstract (up to 150 words), key words, and intertextual headings. Footnotes (not endnotes) or references should be in a separate section.
Coloured images are not accepted. Non-coloured figures and diagrams may be inserted into the text.
The submitted manuscript should contain an information about the author — no longer than 150 words and including author’s academic degree, scholarly affiliation, membership in important organizations, especially international ones, up to five titles of the author’s most significant books or papers with bibliographical data, the author’s email address.
The suggested length of Dialogue and Universalism articles is to 10 000 words; the suggested length of books reviews, and discussion notes — to 3000 words.
The editors will alter manuscripts wherever necessary to conform them to the journal style. The Author is asked for accepting the introduced changes.
Guidelines for the preparation of bibliographical references
The first reference to a book or journal article should have complete bibliographical information. Submitted manuscripts should follow the bibliographical specifications set out below in the form of typical samples.
Hadot, P. 2002. Exercises spirituels et philosophie antique. Paris: Editions Albin Michel, 21–23.
Benett, J. 2001. Learning from Six Philosophers. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 17–18.
Habermas, J. 2003. Truth and Justification. Fultner, B. (Trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 11–13.
Shortened notes (when the reference is repeated):
Hadot, P. 2002, op. cit., 21–23.
Benett, J. 2001, op. cit., 17–18.
Habermas, J. 2003, op. cit., 11–13.
Essays, chapters or other part of an edited book:
Benson, H. H. 2005. “Socrates and the Beginnings of Moral Philosophy.” In: Routledge History of Philosophy. From the Beginning to Plato. Taylor, C. C. W. (Ed.). London–New York: Taylor & Francis Group e-Library, 298–329.
Benson, H. H. 2005, op. cit., 298–329.
Entries, esssays in an e-encyclopedia:
Palmer, J. 2012. “Parmenides.” In: The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Zalta E. N. (Ed.). http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2012/entries/parmenides/.
Palmer, J. 2012, op. cit.
Articles in journals:
Levin, M. 2005. “Evolution vs. Design: Genetic Algorithms May Clarify the Controversy.” Journal of Scientific Exploration, 19 (1), 115–122.
Levin, M. 2005, op. cit., 115–122.
Boland, H. 2013. Art from Synthetic Biology; http://westminsterresearch.wmin.ac.uk/12742/1/Howard_BOLAND.pdf
Boland, H. 2013, op. cit.
Henckmann, W. 2007. “Über einige anthropologische Grenzen von Vertsystemen,;” paper submitted to the International Conference Frontiers of Knowledge in the 21st Century organized by the Italian Association A. von Humboldt and other institutions, Trieste, 27–29 June 2007.
Pattee, H. H. 1995. “Artificial Life Needs a Real Epistemology.” In: Morán, F., A. Moreno, J. J. Merelo, P. Chacón (Eds.). Advances in Artificial Life. Proceedings of the Third European Conference on Artificial Life, Granada, Spain, June 1995, Berlin: Springer, 23.
We allow both the British and American usages, but there must be consistency within the individual article.
All the submitted manuscripts are peer reviewed according to a double-blind reviewing procedure. This is presented in detail in the section REVIEWING on this website; see: http://dialogueanduniversalism.eu/index.php/reviewing/
Authors get their edited and typeset papers—via emails—for proof-reading. Proof-reading is done on an electronic copy of the paper, according to the editors instructions which are delivered in emails.
As a rule the proof-reading phase is not meant to change the paper, its style, content, etc., but only to revise minor errors earlier unnoticed or introduced by mistake in the typesetting process.
Copyright and licensing information
The Authors of articles published in Dialogue and Universalism assign copyright to the journal. Dialogue and Universalism permits to reuse its contents in the majority of cases. The Authors who wish to reuse their papers published in Dialogue and Universalism in other publications are asked for contacting the journal office to agree on details. Permissions are issued free of charge.
The Author may post a copy of his/her paper on his/her institutional website, after the embargo period (12 months) if the website is non-commercial and no fees are charged for access to this paper. A link to the journal’s website or the journal article should be included.
Free paper copy and e-copy for the Author
The Author receives free one paper copy of the Dialogue and Universalism issue containing her/his article. She/He also receives free this issue in its electronic version.
The Authors should provide the sources of financial support of their research (if there are any).
We are not inclined to accept double submissions.
No type of plagiarism is accepted, so the Author of a submission is requested to clearly point out the ideas, conceptions, claims, etc. which are not her/his own and precisely indicate their authors and sources. The Author also should avoid self-plagiarism.
We do not admit the ghostwriting practices. The Authors are responsible for disclosing the information on all persons involved in the production of their submissions.
We do not accept papers which include offensive attacks, discriminatory or intolerant language, impolite tone, personal attacks.
The Dialogue and Universalism editors are responsible for preparing and published the submitted manuscript according to the procedure described here above (http://dialogueanduniversalism.eu/index.php/author-guidelines/); also here: http://dialogueanduniversalism.eu/index.php/reviewing/ as well as according to the declarations presented here: http://dialogueanduniversalism.eu/
The Dialogue and Universalism editors are obliged to carefully investigate every paper suspected of misconduct; they cannot reject it without examination. The editors are responsible for discussing the raise question of misconduct with the reviewer or reviewers of the paper and other external experts. They also request the Author for explaining the situation of misconduct, and, if it is possible, to remove or change the nonadmissible parts of the paper.
If a manuscript is seriously flawed (for whatever reason) the Dialogue and Universalism editors are obliged to retract it. In every case of retraction the editors justify their decision.