Guidelines for Reviewers

In agreeing to publish a review in Hypatia Reviews Online, review authors retain the copyright to their review and give HRO the right to first publication of that review.

Hypatia reviews may take a number of different forms, depending on the topic, format, and significance of the book under review. We ask, however, that contributors follow these broad guidelines for the preparation and submission of review manuscripts to HRO. Reviewers may be required to revise their reviews to meet Hypatia's guidelines. Reviews that do not conform to these guidelines may be rejected by the Book Review Editor.

1) Components of a review

  • Reviews should begin with a brief description of the book, to serve as an abstract that gives readers a sense of the topic and content.
  • Reviewers should provide an overview of the book as a whole, not just of one of its aspects or sections, whether the book is a monograph or an anthology.
  • Reviewers should contextualize the book, and offer an evaluation of at least some of its key themes or components, in addition to providing a summary. Reviewers may want to focus on a subset of the essays included in an anthology or a particular aspect of a monograph for detailed discussion. It is important to give reasons for any evaluation of the book under review, particularly if it is negative. Evaluative comments should be specific and constructive; reviewers should avoid making vague and unproductive claims, such as that an argument is “not feminist” or “not philosophical.”
  • Reviews must be written in a manner that shows respect to book author(s) or editor(s) and HRO readers. Reviewers should evaluate the ideas and arguments presented in the book, avoiding ad hominem criticisms.
  • Reviewers are asked to be attuned to and respectful of diverse philosophical methods and voices. Reviewers are encouraged to familiarize themselves with common exclusionary practices that have served to render philosophy in general, and feminist philosophy in particular, less than welcoming to historically marginalized social groups, and to ensure that those practices are not repeated in the review. This is especially important when reviewing works that challenge dominant ways of doing philosophy.
  • Hypatia has a long tradition of treating reviews as a context in which to foster excellent scholarship in feminist philosophy. With this in mind, we particularly encourage book reviewers to consider the following questions:
    • Does the book you are reviewing make a significant, original contribution to feminist philosophy?
    • Does the author reflect an awareness of the diversity of women’s lives, and of feminist perspectives relevant to the issues they discuss?

2) Format

  • Length: Reviews should run from 1500 to 2500 words. Review authors who feel that the book they are reviewing requires longer or shorter treatment should consult the Book Review Editor.
  • Readability: For online publication we urge that you avoid paragraphs that are longer than half a single-spaced page.
  • Bibliographic entry (header): Begin your review with a bibliographic entry that includes accurate information about the author, title, publisher, place and date of publication, and ISBN number for the book you are reviewing. For example:

    Linda L. Layne, Sharra L. Vostral, and Kate Boyer (editors)
    Feminist Technology
    Urbana, Chicago, and Springfield: University of Illinois Press, 2010.
    ISBN 978-0-252-07720-3

    Kathryn T. Gines
    Hannah Arendt and the Negro Question
    Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2014
    ISBN 978-0-253-01171-8

  • Author’s credit: Below the bibliographical entry, give your name and institutional affiliation as you would like them to appear.

3) Submission guidelines and deadlines

  • Deadlines: To ensure that HRO publishes timely reviews of new books in feminist philosophy, we ask that you submit your review within three months of receiving the book you have agreed to review.
  • Submission: Please submit your review through the Manuscript Central submission and review system. The Hypatia submission page can be found at the following URL. When you reach this site, use the “Book Review” tab to submit your review manuscript. https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/hypa
  • Production: The Hypatia editorial office staff will arrange for your review to be copy-edited when it is accepted by the Book Review Editor. As soon as you approve the copy-edited manuscript your review will be published online.

4) Manuscript Preparation Guidelines

  • File type and format: Manuscripts should be submitted as Word files. They should be double-spaced (including quotations, notes, and references), and the right margin should not be justified.
  • Spelling: Please use American spellings and punctuation, except when directly quoting a source that has followed British style.
  • Commas: Hypatia uses the serial, or Oxford, comma.
  • Notes: Please do not use the “insert endnote/footnote” function in Microsoft Word. Instead, place numerals between arrowheads (e.g.,<2>) in the text. List notes in the penultimate section of the paper (just before the references). Any acknowledgments should appear unnumbered, before the first note. For example:

    Instead of: ...erroneous due to an improper standard of rationality.2
    Use:
    In text: ...erroneous due to an improper standard of rationality.<2>
    In notes: 2. By "standard of rationality," I mean...

  • References:
    In Text Citations
    We use the author/date system of citing references, as described in The Chicago Manual of Style (15th ed., University of Chicago Press, 2003). For in-text citations or endnotes, works should be cited as (author year, page number); for example (Card 2003, 65). The page number alone can be used if understood from the context; for example (86). Multiple citations should be in chronological order, and, if in the same year, alphabetical within year; for example (England 2004; Pierce 2005; Pratt 2005; Jiwani and Young 2006).

    References
    A list of all works cited should be included after the notes in a section called “References.” Works that are not actually cited should not be included in the “References” section. In the reference section, titles of articles and books follow sentence capitalization—only the first word and proper nouns are capitalized. Quotation marks are not needed for articles. Book and journal titles should be italicized. Journal citations should include both volume and issue numbers.

  • Examples:
    Books
    Aysha Hidayatullah. 2014. Feminist Edges of the Qur’an. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Journal Articles
    Calhoun, Chesire. 1995. Standing for something. Journal of Philosophy 92 (5): 235-61.

    Chapter from a Book
    Roberts, Dorothy E. 1999. Mothers who fail to protect their children: Accounting for private and public responsibility. In Mother troubles: Rethinking contemporary maternal dilemmas, ed. Julia E. Hanigsberg and Sara Ruddick. Boston: Beacon.

    Two or More Authors
    Pacala, Stephen, and Robert Socolow. 2004. Stabilization wedges: Solving the climate problem for the next 50 years with current technologies. Science 305 (5686): 968-72.

    Newspaper Article
    Clines, Francis X. 2001. Before and after: Voices in the wind, a new form of grieving evolves over last goodbyes. The New York Times, September 16.

    Website
    National Down Syndrome Society. 2002. About Down Syndrome. http://www.ndss.org/aboutds/aboutds.html (accessed January 8, 2002).

    Legal Document
    Education for All Handicapped Children Act. 1975. U.S. Public Law 94-142, U.S. Code. Vol. 20, sec. 1400 et seq.