Guidelines for Authors and Commentators
- Figures and Tables
- Citations and References
- Peer Review Process
- Open Peer Commentary
- Author Response to Commentaries
- Papers Previously Published Elsewhere
- Multiple Book Reviews
- Public Commentary
Animal Sentience (ASent) is an interdisciplinary journal and welcomes submissions from all academic disciplines. Content should be clear and written in the most accessible language possible. In the interest of maximizing accessibility to commentators and readers from many different specialties, including lay-readers, authors should avoid technical jargon wherever possible. Authors who wish to make additional data available to their readers should indicate, in an explanatory note, where the data, syntax files, or software can be found.
Please look at the journal to see how Articles and Commentaries appear. All manuscripts (whether Articles, Commentaries or authors’ Responses) should have a title, a short bio with photo including the author’s full contact information and institutional affiliation (email and website URL), an abstract of about 200 words for Articles (about 100 words for Commentaries), and a minimum of five keywords. Manuscripts should be single-spaced with references formatted according to the latest edition of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association. ASent has no absolute word limits, but the preferred length is 5000 to 10,000 words for Articles and 500 to 1000 words for Commentaries.
Authors should provide numbered headings and subheadings to facilitate cross-reference by commentators.
All Articles should be accompanied by a cover letter with (1) your rationale for soliciting open peer Commentary on your Article and (2) a multi-disciplinary list of potential commentators, with their emails and website URLs.
Authors should upload their manuscripts in .doc, .docm or .docx format.
Figures and Tables
Tables should be numbered consecutively and should appear in the body of the text, not at the end of the paper. Figures must be supplied as TIFF, EPS, JPEG, or GIF files and should appear in the body of the text, not at the end of the paper. Every figure and table should have a caption. Strive for clarity and ease of interpretation in tables, and especially in figures; what appears self-explanatory to you might not appear so to the reader. Endnotes and appendices should be grouped together at the end of the paper, and, ideally, locally linked within the text to facilitate access for both the referee and the reader. Any acknowledgments should be placed at the end of the paper.
Citations and References
Bibliographic citations in the text must include the author’s last name and the date of publication, and, in the case of quotations, should include page references. Complete bibliographic information for each citation should be included in the list of references, along with a link to any existing URLs.
References should be in alphabetical order in the style of the following examples. Do not abbreviate journal titles.
Elwood, R. W. (2011). Pain and suffering in invertebrates? ILAR Journal, 175-184. doi:10.1093/ilar.52.2175
Matheson, S. M., Asher, L., & Bateson, M. (2008). Larger, enriched cages are associated with ‘optimistic’ response biases in captive European starlings (Sturnus vulgaris). Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 109, 374–383. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2007.03.007
Salwiczek, L. H., Prétôt, L., Demarta, L., Proctor, D., Essler, J., Pinto, A. I., & Bshary, R. (2012). Adult Cleaner Wrasse outperform Capuchin Monkeys, chimpanzees and orang-utans in a complex foraging task derived from cleaner - client reef fish cooperation. Plos ONE, 7, 1-9. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0049068
Braithwaite, V. (2010). Do fish feel pain? New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Authors should also ensure that submissions have been proofread by a native English speaker before submission, as this greatly improves the chances of an Article passing the refereeing stage.
Peer Review Process
All target articles are refereed by 4-6 peers selected by the Editor for their expertise in the subject matter. The criteria are not only scientific soundness but sufficient importance to warrant according them Open Peer Commentary if accepted for publication.
Once the referee reports are received, the Editor -- in consultation with the editorial board when necessary -- integrates the critique and recommendations in the referee reports, and specifies in a disposition letter what revisions are needed (if the referees judge the paper potentially acceptable for publication) and whether the revision will be re-refereed or just editorially reviewed.
All commentaries are editorially reviewed for relevance and soundness (and sent to 1-2 experts for refereeing if there is any uncertainty about soundness).
Open Peer Commentary
After peer review and acceptance for publication, all Articles will be accorded Open Peer Commentary. The peer commentators are either invited by the editors or submit a Commentary directly. A Peer Commentary is a mini-article (about 1000 words) with a title, abstract (100 words) and bio. It is subject to editorial review prior to acceptance.
Author Response to Commentaries
Authors’ Responses to Commentaries resemble Commentaries in format (author, title, abstract, keywords, bio, email, URL). Authors have a choice between (1) responding jointly to multiple Commentaries, in which case the Response, like the Article and each Commentary, should have a title and abstract; or (2) providing a shorter Response to each individual Commentary, which will in that case be appended at the end of the text of each Commentary.
The preferred length for an ASent Author Response to multiple Commentaries is 3,000-5,000 words; normally it should not exceed half the length of the target Article. Commentaries and Responses should have a distinctive and representative (keyword-indexable) title and an abstract summarizing their content as specifically as possible (about 100 words for Commentaries, 200 words for Responses).
Papers Previously Published Elsewhere
Important papers that have already been published elsewhere but are judged especially appropriate for Open Peer Commentary in ASent will occasionally be invited by the editors. Authors can also propose updated versions of previously published papers for re-publication with the agreement of the previous publisher.
Multiple Book Reviews
The service of Open Peer Commentary will be primarily devoted to original, unpublished manuscripts written specifically for treatment by ASent. However, recently published books with contents meeting the standards noted above may also be eligible for Commentary. In these instances, the author should provide a comprehensive, Article-length Précis for publication with the Commentaries and the author’s Response. The Précis has the same format as an Article.
All published Articles and Commentaries will be available to anyone with online access, and anyone may submit a Commentary. All Commentaries will be reviewed by the editors prior to publication with an effort to publish the reviewed Commentaries within seven days of acceptance. There is no guarantee that a submission will be accepted for publication. Editors may require revisions as a condition for acceptance.