Nominate Books for BBS Multiple Book Review

Stevan Harnad harnad at phoenix.Princeton.EDU
Wed Dec 23 00:14:05 EST 1998


This is a Call for nominations for BBS Multiple Book Review.

In the past, Behavioral and Brain Sciences (BBS) journal had only been
able to do 1-2 BBS multiple book treatments per year, because of our
limited annual page quota. BBS's new expanded page quota will make it
possible for us to increase the number of books we treat per year, so
this is an excellent time for BBS Associates and
neuro/cognitive/biobehavioral scientists in general to nominate books
you would like to see accorded BBS multiple book review.

(Authors may self-nominate, but books can only be selected on the basis
of multiple nominations.) It would be very helpful if you indicated in
what way a BBS Multiple Book Review of the book(s) you nominate would
be useful to the field (and of course a rich list of potential
reviewers would be the best evidence of its potential impact!).

------------------------------------------------------------------
        BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES (BBS)
               Multiple Book Review

BBS offers authors the service of Multiple Book Review to authors of
important new books on which it is judged that international,
interdisciplinary peer feedback will be useful to the cognitive and
biobehavioral science community.

        Instructions for Authors and Commentators

Behavioral and Brain Sciences (BBS) is a unique scientific
communication medium, providing the service of Open Peer Commentary
for reports of significant current work in psychology, neuroscience,
behavioral biology or cognitive science. If a manuscript is judged
by BBS referees and editors to be appropriate for Commentary (see
Criteria below), it is then circulated to a large number of
commentators selected (with the aid of systematic bibliographic
searches) from the BBS Associateship* and the worldwide
biobehavioral science community, including individuals recommended
by the author.

Once the Commentary stage of the process has begun, the author
can no longer alter the article, but can respond formally to all
commentaries accepted for publication. The target article,
commentaries, and authors' responses then co-appear in BBS.
Continuing Commentary and replies can appear in later issues.

CRITERIA FOR ACCEPTANCE: To be eligible for publication, a paper
should not only meet the standards of a journal such as
Psychological Review or the International Review of Neurobiology in
terms of conceptual rigor, empirical grounding, and clarity of
style, but should also offer a clear rationale for soliciting
Commentary. That rationale should be provided in the author's
covering letter, together with a list of suggested commentators.

A BBS target article can be (i) the report and discussion of
empirical research that the author judges to have broader scope and
implications than might be more appropriately reported in a
specialty journal; (ii) an unusually significant theoretical
article that formally models or systematizes a body of research; or
(iii) a novel interpretation, synthesis, or critique of existing
experimental or theoretical work. Occasionally, articles dealing
with social or philosophical aspects of the behavioral and brain
sciences will be considered.

MULTIPLE BOOK REVIEW: The service of Open Peer Commentary will be
primarily devoted to original unpublished manuscripts. However, a
recently published book whose contents meet the standards outlined
above may also be eligible for Commentary. In such a BBS Multiple Book
Review, a comprehensive, article length Precis by the author is
published together with the commentaries and the author's response. The
author must confirm the commitment of his publisher to provide the
review copies for those reviewers who have been selected and have
agreed to do the review by the deadline (minimum number 25 needed in
the NY office of BBS/CUP). In special cases, Commentary will also be
extended to a position paper or an already published article dealing
with particularly influential or controversial research. Submission of
an article implies that it has not been published or is not being
considered for publication elsewhere. Multiple book reviews and
previously published articles appear by invitation only. The
Associateship and professional readership of BBS are encouraged to
nominate current topics and authors for Commentary.

In all the categories described, the decisive consideration for
eligibility will be the desirability of Commentary for the submitted
material. Controversiality simpliciter is not a sufficient criterion for
soliciting Commentary: a paper may be controversial simply because it
is wrong or weak. Nor is the mere presence of interdisciplinary aspects
sufficient: general cybernetic and "organismic" disquisitions are not
appropriate for BBS. Some appropriate rationales for seeking Open Peer
Commentary would be that: (1) the material bears in a significant way
on some current controversial issues in behavioral and brain sciences;
(2) its findings substantively contradict some well-established aspects
of current research and theory; (3) it criticizes the findings,
practices, or principles of an accepted or influential line of work;
(4) it unifies a substantial amount of disparate research; (5) it has
important cross-disciplinary ramifications; (6) it introduces an
innovative methodology or formalism for consideration by proponents of
the established forms; (7) it meaningfully integrates a body of brain
and behavioral data; (8) it places a hitherto dissociated area of
research into an evolutionary or ecological perspective; etc. In order
to assure communication with potential commentators (and readers) from
other BBS specialty area, all technical terminology must be clearly
defined or simplified, and specialized concepts must be fully
described.

NOTE TO COMMENTATORS: The purpose of the Open Peer Commentary
service is to provide a concentrated constructive interaction
between author and commentators on a topic judged to be of broad
significance to the biobehavioral science community. Commentators
should provide substantive criticism, interpretation, and
elaboration as well as any pertinent complementary or supplementary
material, such as illustrations; all original data will be refereed
in order to assure the archival validity of BBS commentaries.
Commentaries and articles should be free of hyperbole and remarks
ad hominem.

STYLE AND FORMAT FOR ARTICLES AND COMMENTARIES: Target articles
must not exceed 14,000 words (and should ordinarily be considerably
shorter); commentaries should not exceed 1000 words, including
references. Spelling, capitalization, and punctuation should be
consistent within each article and commentary and should follow the
style recommended in the latest edition of A Manual of Style, The
University of Chicago Press. It may be helpful to examine a recent
issue of BBS.

BBS has a new policy of temporarily mounting on-line the manuscripts
submitted for refereeing (with the author's permission) on the BBS Web
Site [http://bbs.cogsci.soton.ac.uk] as "BBS Submitted Manuscripts
Under Review," accompanied by a flag indicating that the author holds
the copyright. The purpose of this is two-fold:  (1) to accelerate and
facilitate the refereeing process and (2) to establish priority
publicly for submitted manuscripts while they undergo refereeing.
Please indicate with your submission whether you authorise BBS to
archive your submitted manuscript on the Web during refereeing (it is
not compulsory). After refereeing is completed, your manuscript will be
withdrawn, and if it is accepted, the final draft will be archived for
potential commentators in BBS's Preprint Archive.

All submissions must include an indexable title, followed by the
authors' names in the form preferred for publication, full
institutional addresses, email addresses and WWW URLs.
Target article authors must also provide numbered headings and
subheadings to facilitate cross-reference by commentators. Two
abstracts, one of 100 and one of 250 words, should be submitted with
every target article. The shorter abstract will appear one issue in
advance of the article; the longer one will be circulated to potential
commentators and will appear with the printed article. A list of 5-10
keywords should precede all target article texts. Notes,
acknowledgments, appendices, and references should be grouped at the
end of the target article or commentary.

BBS has a new policy that commentaries and responses now
also require Abstracts: ~60 words, summarizing as specifically as
possible the content of your contribution.

Illustrations: Tables and figures (i.e., photographs, graphs,
charts, or other artwork) should be numbered consecutively. Every
table should have a title; every figure, a caption. At least one
reference in the text must indicate the appropriate location. (For
sizes, see below)

References: Bibliographic citations in the text must include the
author's last name and the date of publication and may include page
references. Complete bibliographic information for each citation
should be included in the list of references. Please also include the
WWW URL for any paper for which it exists. Examples of correct
style are: Brown(1973); (Brown 1973); Brown 1973; 1978); (Brown
1973; Jones 1976); (Brown & Jones 1978); (Brown et al. 1978).
References should be typed on a separate sheet in alphabetical
order in the style of the following examples. Do not abbreviate
journal titles:

    Freeman, W.J. (1958) Distribution in time and space of prepyriform
    electrical activity. Journal of Neurophysiology 2: 644-66
    http://cogprints.soton.ac.uk/abs/neuro/199806009

    Dennett, D.C.  (1991) Two contrasts: Folk craft versus folk science
    and belief versus opinion. In: The future of folk psychology:
    Intentionality and cognitive science, ed. J. D.  Greenwood,
    Cambridge University Press.
    http://cogprints.soton.ac.uk/abs/phil/199804005

    Bateson, P. P. G. & Hinde, R. A., eds. (1978) Growing points in
    ethology, Cambridge University Press.

Preparation of the manuscript The original, double-spaced target
article plus eight single-spaced, double-sided copies must be
submitted, along with a screen-readable, web-ready electronic version
sent by email or on disk or deposited in the BBS Archive on the Web. The entire
 manuscript, including notes and
references, must be typed double-spaced (1/4" space between lines) on
8-1/2 by 11 inch paper, with margins set to 70 characters per line (not
"justified") and 25 lines per page, and should not exceed 50 pages.
Pages should be numbered consecutively. Commentators should submit their
original plus two copies, as well as a screen-readable electronic
version sent by email or on disk. It will be necessary to return manuscripts
for retyping if they do not conform to BBS format.

Each table and figure should be submitted on a separate page, not
interspersed with the text. Tables should be typed to conform to BBS
style. Figures should be ready for photographic reproduction; they
cannot be redrawn by the printer. Charts, graphs, or other artwork
should be done in black ink on white paper and should be drawn to
occupy a standard area of 8-1/2 by 11 or 8-1/2 x 5-1/2 inches before
reduction. Photographs should be glossy black-and-white prints; 8 by 10
inch enlargements are preferred. All labels and details on figures
should be clearly printed and large enough to remain legible even after
a reduction to half size. It is recommended that labels be done in
transfer type of a sans-serif face such as Helvetica.

Send all submissions, plus a screen-readable, Web-ready version
by email, Web submission or on disk to:

      Stevan Harnad, Editor
      Behavioral and Brain Sciences
      Electronics and Computer Science Department
      University of Southampton
      Highfield, Southampton
      SO17 1BJ UNITED KINGDOM
      bbs at ecs.soton.ac.uk
      http://bbs.cogsci.soton.ac.uk

In case of doubt as to appropriateness for BBS commentary, authors
should write to the editor before submitting eight copies.

EDITING: The publishers reserve the right to edit and proof all
articles and commentaries accepted for publication. Authors of articles
will be given the opportunity to review the copy-edited manuscript and
page proofs. Commentators will be asked to review copy-editing only
when changes have been substantial; commentators will not see proofs.
Both authors and commentators should notify the editorial office of all
corrections within 48 hours or approval will be assumed.

Authors of target articles receive 50 offprints of the entire
treatment, and can purchase additional copies. Commentators will also
be given an opportunity to purchase offprints of the entire treatment.
___________________________________________________________
*Individuals interested in serving as BBS Associates are asked to
write to the editor.





More information about the Comp-bio mailing list