Evaluation and copyright policies

Evaluation policy

Evaluation procedures vary whether the submission is for a Special Report, an article under the “Studies” (varia) rubric, or destined for the rubrics “Current Debate” and “On the Subject of…,” for the paper version of the journal, or for the blog Hypothèses.org. See the journal’s presentation at: https://ds.hypotheses.org/revue-droit-et-societe

 

For all publications:

Droit & Société does not charge publication costs nor does it remunerate its evaluators.

Average evaluation period: 3 to 4 months

Average time from manuscript acceptance to publication: 6 months to 1 year.

 

For submissions to the “Studies” rubric:

Manuscripts received are first read by the editorial team, which determines if the text is suitable for the domain and the journal’s editorial policy. Regardless of their quality, submissions that do not adhere to these criteria will be rejected without entering double-blind review.

If the manuscript adheres to the journal’s editorial line, it is transmitted to two referees chosen by the editors and the editorial committee for evaluation according to their competencies. Manuscripts undergo a double-blind review using a form provided by the editors.

See: Evaluation Form D&S (ENG) [PDF].

Four scenarios are possible:

  1. Accepted as is;
  2. Accepted pending minor changes;
  3. Accepted pending substantial changes;
  4. Rejected

The editorial team will reach its decision based on the evaluators’ reports. If they diverge, a third reader will be sought.

In the second and third cases above, the author(s) will be provided with both the anonymized readers’ reports and the opportunity to revise and resubmit (the modifications must be clearly marked in the body of the text). Resubmissions must be accompanied by a justification of the integration (or not) of the evaluators’ recommendations.

Articles and final versions are accepted for publication by the editors and follow a double-blind review process.

Note: among the evaluation criteria, evaluators are alerted to the risk of plagiarism.

 

For submissions to the paper edition’s rubrics “Current Debate” and “On the Subject of…” as well as for articles published on the journal’s Hypothèses.org blog:

The editors solicit authors according a theme. The text is evaluated by the editors, who, as needed, seek the views of the editorial board or from external experts. Corrections and modifications may be requested. The same procedure applies to unsolicited submissions.

 

For the Special Reports, the review process is as follows:

Dossier proposals must include a maximum five-page general argument as well as an outline of the four to five articles including their titles and summaries. Submitters are responsible for soliciting their contributors and for defining with them the content of their articles. The editorial team transmits Dossier proposals to the editorial board for their opinion.

In the event of a positive opinion, the editorial board will designate two referees to monitor the completion of the dossier and assure the scholarly quality of the proposal by evaluating the ensemble and each individual article. The editorial board’s commentaries and suggestions are transmitted to the dossier’s submitters so that they can be taken into account. When the first draft of the dossier is available, the referees are responsible for the scholarly evaluation of the entire dossier and its individual articles. They transmit their evaluations and commentaries in order to prepare a second version (V2) of the dossier. If certain articles have issues, new versions may be requested. The referees, the editors, the dossier’s proposers, and the authors of the articles will work together to finalize the dossier.

In general, the accepted dossier will be published after going through the review process. There is an exception: if the dossier is rejected because of insufficient overall quality, positively reviewed articles may be published, with the authors’ permission, under the “Studies” rubric. It is not uncommon for an article initially proposed as part of a dossier not to be published if its V3 or even V4 is of insufficient quality and does not live up to the journal’s criteria.

In the event of a negative decision, the editorial board will provide ample feedback to the project’s leaders, who will be invited to submit a revised version of the proposal to the editorial board. Its members will then decide whether to accept or decline the proposed dossier. If accepted, two editorial correspondents will monitor the dossier’s completion and ensure the scholarly evaluation of the entire dossier and its individual articles. The process will proceed in the same manner as for proposed dossiers accepted for publication.

In the event of a critical opinion, the editorial board will provide ample feedback to the project’s leaders including requests for clarification or modifications (addition of specific scholarly elements, for example). The project leaders will be invited to submit a revised version of the proposal to the editorial board, whose members will then decide whether to accept or decline the proposed “special report” or dossier. If accepted, two referees will monitor the dossier’s completion and ensure the scholarly evaluation of the entire dossier and its individual articles. The process will proceed in the same manner as for proposed dossiers accepted for publication.

 

Copyright and distribution policy

Authors whose manuscript has been accepted for publication cede to the Association Droit & Société exclusive rights, for one year from signing of the contract, to use their contribution in its paper and digital form. After one year, the rights will revert to non-exclusivity. For all future publications, it is requested that authors indicate the exact reference for the first appearance of their contribution in Droit & Société and to notify the journal of the new publication information.

Articles are not remunerated.

Authors may deposit in an open access repository, such as HAL:

  • the “pre-print” version of the manuscript upon its acceptance for publication (i.e., the version accepted for publication, which takes into account the evaluators’ comments and requests for corrections, prior to final editing and layout)
  • the “final version of the manuscript accepted for publication” after its publication in Droit & Société (i.e., the version accepted for publication and whose content has undergone final editing (normalized, harmonized, and formalized) but not final layout for the journal). 

 

 

Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search