Studia Phaenomenologica encourages submissions in all areas of phenomenology and aims to publish first-rate articles on a diversity of topics. We consider original articles 10,000 words in length (60.000 characters including spaces, notes and references) or less. Studia Phaenomenologica is open to considering longer manuscripts of exceptional quality, with the editor’s permission. The journal only considers submissions that are not published elsewhere and not currently under consideration at another journal. We aim to reach decisions on submissions in 4 months. Studia Phaenomenologica is peer-reviewed and review is double-anonymous. This means that neither authors nor reviewers know one another’s identities.
Submitted manuscripts must be prepared for anonymous review. This means that the author's name and other identifying information must be removed from the text and replaced with "deleted for anonymous review". Identifying information must also be removed from other locations, such as the "Properties" section in the manuscript file.
Manuscripts should be submitted in Word format (.doc, .docx, .rtf). Submissions must contain an abstract (up to 150 words), and a reference list. Any reasonable formatting style for notes and references is fine at the time of submission. If the manuscript is accepted for publication the author will be asked to bring it into line with the journal’s style published here: https://zetabooks.com/library/journals/studia-phaenomenologica/.
Studia Phaenomenologica only accepts submissions by email to [email protected].
As a condition of publication in Studia Phaenomenologica, authors must complete a publication agreement that gives the journal permission to publish and preserve the author's work. There are two options:
- The standard publication agreement ensures publication in the journal in all formats, and preserves the author's right to reuse the manuscript in any other publication the author may write or edit. There is no charge to the author for submission or publication.
- An open access publication agreement may be offered in special cases with editorial approval. It ensures publication with a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives publishing license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) that gives everyone the unlimited right to copy, download or use the text for non-commercial purposes. This option is sustained by a one-time open access fee and is only offered with editorial approval.
Studia Phaenomenologica is published by Zeta Books
Questions for the Editor
Authors with questions about submission may contact the editor by email as listed below:
University of Bucharest
Institute for Research in the Humanities
1, Dimitrie Brandza St.
RO- 060102 Bucharest, Romania
Publication Ethics Statement
The editorial team of Studia Phaenomenologica is committed to ensuring the integrity of the publication process. Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to confirm a chain of reasoning or experimental result. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers must treat received manuscripts as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviews should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors or institutions connected to the paper.
The Publisher will respond to alleged or proven cases of research misconduct, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism in close collaboration with the editors. The publisher will ensure that appropriate measures are taken to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question if necessary. This may include the publication of an erratum, clarification or, in the most severe case, the retraction of the affected work. The publisher, together with the editors, shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, and under no circumstances encourage such misconduct or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place.