Search of similar publications

It is better to have an idea of the Journal in which you want to publish your research before writing the article. Choosing the Journal before you start writing means that you can adapt your work on the basis of the research already published by that Journal. This can help the editors see your article as contributing to the ‘conversation’ already going on in their Journal, to refute, confirm, or re-examine it. Moreover, you will find that many Journals only accept specific article formats and may have word limits and other restrictions. You can browse our Journals by subject area here: Catalogue

Draft

Editorial guidelines

Guidelines

Editorial workflow

1

The Editors of each Journal/Series (Editor-in-chief and Editorial Board) take care of the creation of the profiles of their Authors and Reviewers within the editorial platform, undertaking to enter - and keep updated - all their personal information.

1. ECF is not responsible for incorrect entries of data relating to Authors and Reviewers or for the consequences deriving from this.
2. At the time of the first login, the system requires every User to give their consent for the processing of personal data (for the privacy policy see the item ‘Notes on the Processing of Personal Data’).

2

The editorial staff of ECF verifies that the documents comply with the aforementioned editorial rules and has the right to reject and request an adaptation of articles not suitable for the standards of the Journal/Series.

3

It is essential to subject every scientific text to double-blind peer review. Certain types of texts are excluded from this procedure, such as: introductions, prefaces, editorials, reviews and the like. Based on the choices made by the individual advisory boards, texts or entire volumes deriving from conferences or other contexts that have already passed an evaluation process can be excluded from the double-blind peer review. In the event of failure to perform a double blind peer review, due notice will be given within the publication.

4

To ensure the proper conduct of the mutually anonymous scientific evaluation processes of the articles (double-blind peer review), every care must be taken so that the identity of the Authors and Reviewers remains mutually unknown. Therefore it is essential that, before uploading any document, Authors and Reviewers (if the latter attach their own documents to the evalutation form) - and any other operating subject - remove:

1. any information that may lead to personal identification (the Authors must quote themselves using only the word ‘Author’);
2. any information contained in the ‘Properties’ of the text files. In the main text editing programmes, such as Word, OpenOffice, LibreOffice, it is necessary to follow this simple procedure: Main menu > Document > Properties > Remove personal information > Save.

5

The assignment of the articles to the Reviewers is carried out exclusively through the ECF editorial platform by the Editor-in-Chief of the Journal/Series, who is responsible for meeting the review deadlines.

6

If the outcome of the reviews contains one or more requests for changes to the text, the Author must upload a second draft of the document within 10 days.

7

At the end of the reviews of all articles, the editorial staff starts the pagination and editing processes. If in the course of these activities, gaps, inaccuracies or the lack of elements or information necessary for the completion of the article emerge, the editorial staff may stop the work and return the document to the Author for its completion, with consequent postponement of the first proofs.

8

ECF submits to the Authors only one proof in PDF format. The Authors will return the corrected proof within 8 days of its receipt. Corrections can only be reported within the PDF file using the appropriate Adobe Acrobat or equivalent marking tools. You can use the tutorial downloadable from here.

9

A minimum of 8 weeks passes between the completion of all reviews and publication.

10

Compliance with regular publication according to the periodicity of the Journal is the responsibility of the Editor-in-chief.

Scientific certification

The evaluation is carried out in accordance with and adherence to the scientific criteria indicated below, and to the editorial criteria of bibliographic completeness and formal consistency of Edizioni Ca’ Foscari.

Revision policies for the different sections:

1. complete volume/issue: subject to peer review;
2. introductions, prefaces: no peer review;
3. monographs/essays/articles: subject to peer review;
4. reviews: no peer review;
5. editorials: no peer review.

1

ECF is the University Press of Ca’ Foscari University of Venice. It has an Editorial Board that is made up of a representative from each of the three main subject areas: humanities, linguistics, economics.

2

The Editorial Board receives, evaluates and approves each proposal for a new Journal/Series on the basis of the following criteria::

1. they must have an editor-in-chief and an advisory board of scholars of evident scientific value. It is recommended that these come mainly from other universities, preferably international;
2. must present elements of originality in the subject matter, in the research and methodological approach;
3. they must include among their bodies an editorial board in charge of overseeing the peer review process and assisting ECF in coordinating the editorial flow, in compliance with general editorial criteria and in compliance with punctuality in the periodicity of publication.

3

4

ECF provides all users with access to a peer review platform. The recommended scientific evaluation standard is that of anonymous double evaluation by independent professors or researchers external to the advisory boards of the Journal/Series (double-blind peer review).

5

ECF offers constant and timely support in the use of the platform.

6

The Scientific Direction of the Journal/Series is autonomous and independent in the conduct of the call-for-papers, in the choice of peer reviewers, in the conduct of the evaluations, in compliance with ECF policy and general warnings.

7

The Advisory Board identifies the reviewers. They must present an adequate curriculum and an appreciable number of publications, preferably subjected to quality control procedures. It is recommended that they do not belong to the university to which the Journal/Series is affiliated.

8

Within the peer review platform, the Journal/Series has a specific profile, whose accountable and main manager is the Editor-in-chief.

9

Each article is uploaded anonymously to the platform by the Author and is assigned by the Editor-in-chief to a pair of Reviewers. The Author and the Reviewers cannot come into contact with each other, not even indirectly, during the entire evaluation process.

10

The Reviewer has to determine if the document is:

1. ‘Accepted’
2. ‘Rejected’

11

If the document is ‘accepted’, the Reviewer has to specify if it is:

1. ‘accepted as it is’
2. ‘accepted with request of minor/major revision’

12

The Reviewer justifies his/her decision by filling in an evaluation form in which he/she expresses a qualitative judgment of the article regarding the following items: ‘Significance’, ‘Relevance’, ‘Originality, new insights’, ‘Research methods’, ‘Adequacy of citations and accuracy of references’, ‘Consistency and quality of argumentation and presentation’, ‘Writing style, grammar’. The Reviwer has to select one of the following 5 levels:

1. ‘poor’
2. ‘needs improvements’
3. ‘average’
4. ‘good’
5. ‘excellent’

However, For each of these judgments it is possible to add a discursive comment.

13

The article is considered as ‘rejected’ by the evaluation system if even only one of the two Reviewers rejects it. In this case, the Editor-in-chief may submit the document to a third judgment.

14

If the Reviewers have requested changes to the article, the Author must provide a second version, whose acceptance will be subject to the favorable opinion of the Editor-in-chief.

15

At the end of the peer review process, ECF further verifies that the document complies with the prescribed editorial standards and, if necessary, requests the Editor-in-chief or the Editorial Board to adapt or to have the document conformed to the established standards. The process is then concluded and the editorial staff starts the process of publishing the evaluated and accepted documents.

16

The entire review process is tracked, stored and archived in the platform database, which resides on a server managed by Ca’ Foscari University of Venice. Authors and Reviewers maintain access to the archive linked to their respective profiles, where a track of all the activities carried out is kept.

What is Crossref?

Crossref makes research outputs easy to find, cite, link, and assess.

Crossref exists to make scholarly communications better.

We are member of a non-profit organisation that runs a registry of metadata and DOIs, and involves staff, board, working groups, and committees as well as a broad range of collaborators, users, and supporters in the wider scholarly communications community. Together, we are all working toward the same goal – to enhance scholarly communications. Everything is designed to put scholarly content in context so that the content members publish can be found, cited, used, and re-used.

Crossref helps increase discoverability and create persistent links between research outputs such as articles, books, references, data, components, versions, and more. Crossref members send their metadata – which include fields such as dates, titles, authors, affiliations, etc. – to Crossref, together with a DOI (Digital Object Identifier), which allows to always retrieve an object even if the website changes.

Through Crossref, members are distributing their metadata downstream, making it available to numerous systems and organisations that together help credit and cite the work, track outcomes and activity, and more.

You can find more information here: https://www.crossref.org/about/

Promotion

Search of similar publications

It is better to have an idea of the Series in which you want to publish your research before writing the article. Choosing the Journal before you start writing means that you can adapt your work on the basis of the research already published by that Journal. This can help the editors see your article as contributing to the ‘conversation’ already going on in their Journal, to refute, confirm, or re-examine it. Moreover, you will find that many Journals only accept specific article formats and may have word limits and other restrictions. You can browse our Journals by subject area here: Catalogue

Draft

Proposals should be approximately 10 pages long (excluding CVs and sample material).

Save your publication proposal as a Word document and include the following information. This will help us review your proposal and reply promptly.

Title

1. A good title is crucial for the marketing of your book.
2. The main title should be short and clear and communicate the topic of your book.
3. Subtitles can add additional information.
4. Include keywords in the title and subtitle to help readers discover your book - think about words people might use in search engines like Google to find your book.

Signature

1. Your name and affiliation, along with the names and affiliations of anyone who is an author, editor or translator of your book.

Summary

1. Summarise your book in 10-15 words.
2. Do not repeat the title or subtitle.
3. You can use a sentence or a question.

Idea

1. A paragraph (about 150 words) describing the main purpose of your book: what it is about, why it matters, and how it will benefit the reader.
2. Use simple language and avoid clichés and overused words (e.g. accessible, comprehensive, innovative, original, new and revolutionary). Instead, show how your book might turn out to be new and exciting through the description of the content.

Main features and benefits

1. A short bulleted list of your book’s distinctive qualities and positive features.
2. Be specific and give examples: what are the case studies about? What primary sources do they draw from? Who do they interact with? If they are interdisciplinary, which disciplines do they combine?
3. Each key feature should be expressed in one sentence.

For example:

1. “It discusses cases from Belgium, Great Britain, New Zealand, Canada, Spain, Italy, Québec and several cases Latin Americans”.
2. “It critically reinterprets the history of psychoanalysis after the Second World War”.
3. “It brings together leading researchers from a wide range of subject areas: history, law, philosophy, anthropology”.

Keywords

1. A list of at least 5 keywords that summarise the main concepts discussed in your book.
2. Think about what people might type into a search engine if they wanted to find out what your book is about.
3. Try to find a balance: not too general but not too specific.
4. Include the title and subtitle keywords.
5. These keywords help our editors rank your book for bookstores and libraries, and will also form a clickable keyword list on our website linking books on similar topics.

Some examples of keyword lists are:

1. Simone de Beauvoir; women’s history; 20th century politics; social class; gender studies.
2. French Enlightenment; Jean-Jacques Rousseau; Civil society; Voltaire; Denis Diderot.

Brief synopsis of the book’s objectives, scope, topic and approach:

1. which thematic area does your book belong to?
2. how will you approach and present the topics?
3. how will your book be structured?
4. what themes, concepts and ideas will you develop?
5. is it an overview or an in-depth study?
6. what will be included and what will be excluded, and why?

Chapter by chapter description of the content and form:

1. the list of the chapters;
2. make sure that all chapter titles, including the introduction and conclusion, have keywords that describe the chapter, so that its title makes sense even when read individually;
3. the main subtitles, if appropriate;
4. a paragraph outlining the content of each chapter, including introduction and conclusion;
5. a list of the main authors, texts, case studies, or examples covered in that chapter;
6. the estimated number of words for each chapter.

Category of the book and level of readers

What kind of book are you proposing?

1. monograph;
2. miscellany;
3. edited book;
4. textbook;
5. manual;
6. critical edition.

What level of readers is your book suitable for?

1. MA students;
2. BA students;
3. PhD students;
4. academics, scholars and researchers.

Readers

1. who will read your book? What level will they be: university students, PhD students, academics?
2. what is the main topic of your book? Is it also aimed at people interested in other subject areas?
3. what courses could your book be used in?
4. is your book particularly relevant in some countries?

Special requirements for textbooks

For textbooks, include information about courses that might adopt the book as their primary textbook:

1. university/institution;
2. course title;
3. course level;
4. number of students (if known);
5. name of the course coordinator (if known).

Similar books

1. list 3-5 similar books published in the past 5 years;
2. Include title, author, publisher, year of publication, price, and number of pages;
3. think of these as recommendations: ‘If you liked these books, you will like my book too’;
4. similar books deal with a similar topic, which people may purchase along with your book;
5. similar books should belong to the same book type (e.g. monograph, textbook) and intended for a similar audience;
6. tell us what sets your book apart: why should people buy it?

Similar titles by Edizioni Ca’ Foscari

1. Provide two examples of similar books by Edizioni Ca’ Foscari to show how your book fits into our catalogue.

Word count

1. include preface, acknowledgments, footnotes, bibliography, and appendices;
2. do not include the table of contents.

Expected delivery date of the complete texts

1. tell us when you think you will be able to send the complete manuscript;
2. writing often takes longer than you think: make a realistic estimate;
3. include a writing plan.

Example material

1. provide a sample chapter or other published material related to the proposed book;
2. a sample chapter is required if this is your first book.

CV

Include:

1. a list of relevant publications;
2. your place of residence;
3. telephone numbers;
4. your email address.

Peer review

1. list 8 specialist readers that we should turn to for an academic opinion on your proposal;
2. although it is important to include eminent people in your field, the principles of equality, diversity and inclusion are important to Edizioni Ca’ Foscari, so please take them into account for these suggestions;
3. include names, institutions, and email addresses;
4. do not include colleagues from your institution, your PhD supervisor or examiners.

Edited books - special requirements

1. suggested collaborators’ names and affiliations;
2. if the collaborators have agreed to contribute;
3. title, synopsis and word count for each proposed chapter;
4. the quality control and editing procedures you will adopt as editor of the volume.

Books with illustrations (including tables and graphs) - special requirements

For books with illustrations, include the following information:

1. a brief statement on why illustrations are essential to accompany the text;
2. the type of illustration. For example: photographs, drawings, maps, diagrams, graphs, tables, figures;
3. the number of illustrations in each chapter;
4. funding to cover the cost of copyright permits;
5. any funding to cover the cost of colour printing (otherwise, the illustrations will be printed in black and white).

Books with additional online resources - special requirements

We are happy to consider including additional resources that may be hosted on our website. We recommend that you only suggest extra resources if they add benefits that a book alone cannot provide. For example, the resources could be teaching guides; exercises for students; data set; links to websites; Images; video or audio files.

Reproduction of copyrighted material

If you plan to include copyrighted material that requires permission to be used (such as a long excerpt from a fictional text), please let us know if you have paid the necessary permissions or have access to the funds to do so.

Submit your publication proposal

Send your publication proposal as a Word document, together with the sample material, to the scientific direction of the Series of your choice. Alternatively, you can fill out the ‘Submit a proposal’ form.

If you have any questions, please contact us and we will be happy to help you.

We look forward to receiving your publication proposal. Good luck!

Guidelines

1. The submission of the articles by the Authors takes place exclusively by uploading them to the ECFPeerflow peer review editorial platform, specially made available by ECF. Each Journal/Series has a specific profile in the editorial platform. Instructions for use are available within the platform.
2. Only the Journal’s/Series’ Advisory Board can register Authors in the platform and create their personal profiles. Access to a user's personal profile consists of:
1. the e-mail address provided by the User himself;
2. a password chosen by the User during the first login;
3. a role (Author, Project Editor, Editor, Reviewer) that can be chosen from a drop down menu.
3. The Author can request registration and submit an article proposal through the appropriate ‘Contact‘ or ‘Submit‘ areas on the homepage of each Journal/Series.
4. Before sending the manuscript, the Author must verify that:
1. the article complies with the editorial guidelines;
2. the article is totally anonymised, without any direct or indirect reference to their identity both within the body text and the file settings;
3. the file is exclusively in a .docx version (Word).
5. When submitting their articles Authors are required to:
1. certify that they have thoroughly read and accepted the guidelines;
2. fill in and sign the publishing agreement they have received via email;
3. indicate the attribution to their work of a Creative Commons licence as specified under ‘Copyright and licences’;
4. give consent to the use of the metadata of the published document;
5. have a Title (and Subtitle), abstract in English composed according to the appropriate guidelines and keywords in English.