Start Submission Become a Reviewer

Editorial Policies

Peer Review Process

Step-by-step procedure goes as follows:

1. Submission of a Manuscript
The corresponding or submitting author submits the manuscript to Tilburg Law Review by e-mail at tilburglawreview@tilburguniversity.edu.

2. Editorial Office Assessment
The Editorial Board checks the manuscript to make sure it falls under the scope of the journal and is in accordance with the guidelines of Tilburg Law Review. The Editorial Board will only consider submissions which have not been previously published, nor are currently under consideration by another journal. The quality of the manuscript is not assessed at this point.

3. Internal and External Reviewer Assignment
If the submitted manuscript is considered appropriate for the journal, the Executive Managing Editor sends invitations for review to anonymous internal and external reviewers. Internal reviewers are usually PhD-students currently employed by Tilburg Law School and part of the editorial staff of Tilburg Law Review (hence: internal). External reviewers are recognized legal professionals and/or scholars, which are invited to review on the basis of their field of expertise, interest and availability.

4. Review is Conducted
In case the reviewers accept the invitation for review, the external reviewer will evaluate the paper according to the qualitative and quantitative Tilburg Law Review evaluation forms (see annex). The internal reviewer may submit specific comments in the text of the manuscript for substantive improvement.
Both reviews are submitted to the Editorial Board within an agreed deadline, with a recommendation to accept or reject it – or else with a request for (either major or minor) revision before it is reconsidered.

5. Editorial Office Evaluates the Reviews
The Editorial Board considers the returned reviews before making an initial decision. If the reviews differ widely, the board may invite an additional reviewer so as to get an extra opinion before making a decision.

6. Copy-editor Assignment
If the Editorial Board initially approves the manuscript for publication by the Editorial Board, the Executive Managing Editor assigns the manuscript to a copy-editor. During this stage the formatting, fluency, language, grammar and footnotes are assessed and corrected with track changes. Copy-editors are bachelor- or master-students from Tilburg Law School that are interested in academic research and highly proficient in the English language.

7. Authors’ Response
The Editorial Board forwards the reviewers’ comments and the copy-editor’s corrections to the author. The author is granted the opportunity to consider the suggestions for improvement that the reviewers and the copy-editor put forward.

8. Final Assessment
Once the author returns the amended manuscript, the Editorial Board evaluates whether the author sufficiently addressed the points raised by the reviewers and the copy-editor. If needed, the Editorial Board may assign the manuscript once more to a copy-editor. Otherwise, the Editorial Board issues a final decision to reject or accept the manuscript for publication. The author will be notified of the decision.

Anonymity is strictly maintained throughout the entire editorial procedure. Neither the author nor the reviewers know each other's identity.

The journal is happy to accept submissions of papers that have been loaded onto preprint servers or personal websites, have been presented at conferences, or other informal communication channels. These formats will not be deemed prior publication. Authors must retain copyright to such postings. Authors are encouraged to link any prior posting of their paper to the final published version within the journal, if it is editorially accepted.

Reviewer Guidelines

Reviewers are asked to provide comment on the below topics and guidelines:

  • Content: Does the article fit within the scope of the journal? Is the submission original, relevant and rigorous? Is the author’s depth of understanding of the issues researched adequate? Are the sources and references adequate? Has the existing knowledge base been explored and built upon? Are the chosen methodologies appropriate and have they and the evidential base been appropriately used? Does the conclusion reflect the argument in the main body text and bring something new to the debate?
  • Structure and argument: Does the abstract summarise the arguments in a succinct and accurate way? Is the manuscript logically structured and do the arguments flow coherently? Is there enough reference to methodology in the introduction and are the arguments fully evidenced and substantiated? Does the introduction signpost the arguments in the logical way and does the conclusion adequately summarise them?
  • Figures/tables: Does the author’s use of tables, charts, figures or maps illustrate the arguments and support the evidential base? Is the quality of the formatting and presentation adequate?
  • Formatting: Does the submitted file adhere to the general author guidelines listed for the journal? Are the citations and references formatted to house-style?
  • Language: Is the text well written and jargon free? Please comment on the quality of English and need for grammatical improvement.

Preprint Policy

The journal allows authors to deposit draft versions of their paper into a suitable preprint server, on condition that the author agrees to the below:

  • The author retains copyright to the preprint and developed works from it, and is permitted to submit to the journal.
  • The author declares that a preprint is available within the cover letter presented during submission. This must include a link to the location of the preprint.
  • The author acknowledges that having a preprint publicly available means that the journal cannot guarantee the anonymity of the author during the review process, even if they anonymise the submitted files (see review policy).
  • Should the submission be published, the authors are expected to update the information associated with the preprint version to show that a final version has been published in the journal, including the DOI linking directly to the publication.

ORCID

The journal strongly recommends that all authors submitting a paper register an account with Open Researcher and Contributor Identifier (ORCID). Registration provides a unique and persistent digital identifier for the account that enables accurate attribution and improves the discoverability of published papers, ensuring that the correct author receives the correct credit for their work. As the ORCID remains the same throughout the lifetime of the account, changes of name, affiliation, or research area do not effect the discoverability of an author's past work and aid correspondence with colleagues.

The journal encourages all corresponding authors to include an ORCID within their submitting author data whilst co-authors are recommended to include one. ORCID numbers should be added to the author data upon submission and will be published alongside the submitted paper, should it be accepted.

Data Policy

The journal strongly encourages authors to make all data associated with their submission openly available, according to the FAIR principles (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable). This should be linked to from a Data Accessibility Statement within the submitted paper, which will be made public upon publication. If data is not being made available with the journal publication, a statement from the author should be provided to explain why. Data obtained from other sources must be appropriately credited. When depositing data for a submission, the below should be considered:

  • The repository the data is deposited in must be suitable for this subject and have a sustainability model.
  • The data must be deposited under an open license that permits unrestricted access (e.g. CC0, CC-BY). More restrictive licenses should only be used if a valid reason (e.g. legal) is present.
  • The deposited data must include a version that is in an open, non-proprietary format.
  • The deposited data must have been labelled in such a way that a 3rd party can make sense of it (e.g. sensible column headers, descriptions in a readme text file). 
  • Research involving human subjects, human material, or human data, must have been performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Where applicable, the studies must have been approved by an appropriate ethics committee. The identity of the research subject should be anonymised whenever possible. For research involving human subjects, informed consent to participate in the study must be obtained from participants (or their legal guardian). 
  • A ‘Data Accessibility Statement’ should be added to the submission, prior to the reference list, providing the details of the data accessibility, including the DOI linking to it. If the data is restricted in any way, the reasoning should be given. 

A list of data repositories is available at http://oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/Data_repositories.

Competing Interests, Funding and Ethics 

To ensure transparency, all authors, reviewers and editors are required to declare any interests that could compromise, conflict or influence the validity of the publication. Competing interests guidelines can be viewed here.

In addition, authors are required to specify funding sources and detail requirements for ethical research in the submitted manuscript (see Author Guidelines).

Corrections and Retractions

In accordance with guidelines from the Committee on Publication Ethics (where applicable), the Press handles different kinds of error. All articles have their proofs checked prior to publication by the author/editor, which should ensure that content errors are not present. Please contact your editorial manager if an article needs correcting.

Post-publication changes are not permitted to the publication, unless in exceptional circumstances. If an error is discovered in a published article then the publisher will assess whether a Correction paper or Retraction is required. Please contact the editor for the full Correction/Retraction policy.

Misconduct and Complaints

Allegations of misconduct will be taken with utmost seriousness, regardless of whether those involved are internal or external to the journal, or whether the submission in question is pre- or post-publication. If an allegation of misconduct is made to the journal, it must be immediately passed on to the publisher, who will follow guidelines from the Committee  on Publication Ethics (COPE) on how to address the nature of the problem. Should the matter involve allegations against a member of the journal or publishing team, an independent and objective individual(s) may be sought to lead the investigation.

Should an author wish to lodge a complaint against an editorial decision or the editorial process in general they should first approach the Editor-in-Chief of the journal, explaining their complaint and ask for a reasoned response. Should this not be forthcoming or inadequate, they should raise the matter with the publisher, who will investigate the nature of the complaint and act as arbiter on whether the complaint should be upheld and investigated further. This will follow guidelines set out by COPE.

Section Policies

Research Articles

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed

Review

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed

The Montesquieu Lecture

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed

Lecture Articles

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed

Commentaries

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed

Editorial

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed

Quick links