Home ·Biography· Member Login ·Bibliography· Books Essays Bios/Critiques Recordings Quotations ·Colloquia· In Person Art & Literature Psychotherapy Philosophy & Religion Peace & Conflict Shamanism & Rebirth Politics of Diagnosis Therapeutic Communities ·SLS Annual· Submit a Paper ·About the SLS· Site Staff Advisors Patrons & Sponsors Join the Society Contact us · Resources · Search the Site Notes and Notation A Timeline Further Links About this site In the News SLS Newsletter Discussion Associate site The International R.D. Laing Institute

· Guidelines for Submission · Note: These guidelines apply to the SLS Annual only and do not apply to articles published in the colloquia. To submit a paper for publication in the colloquia, please email Margreta Carr an abstract , and she'll contact you. Following is an explanation of the procedure for submission of papers for publication the Society For Laingian Studies Annual Journal. Papers accepted for online publication are automatically considered for inclusion in the SLS Annual. Additionally, the paper may be translated into French, Spanish, Italian or German for simultaneous publication online. The first step is to submit an abstract to the Editor-In-chief with a note specifying to which of the areas of research the paper belongs. The site is organised along the following areas of research: 1. In Person Essays and reflections on Laing's principal contributions to the philosophy and psychology of madness. 2. Art & Literature 'An entertainment in conversation and verse', poetry, music and fiction, citations and samples. 3. Psychotherapy a) Laing and Freud & followers b) Laing and Jung & Co. c) Existential Psychiatry d) Feminist Therapy and Family Therapy e) Misc. 4. Laing, Philosophy & Religion a) Ancient and medieval philosophy b) Kierkegaard & Nietzsche c) Husserl, Heidegger d) Sartre e) Buber, Tillich and others f ) Bateson et. al g) Scottish philosophy h) Eastern philosophy 5. Shamanism/Rebirth References and articles considering life before birth, experience of rebirth in shamanic initiation and therapy. 6. Therapeutic Communities Essays and commentary by patients and staff examining therapeutic communities past and present. 7. The Politics of Diagnosis The politics of diagnosis in general and the DSM in particular, in addition to examining the larger issues in critical psychiatry and psychology. If your paper bears relevance to more than one of the the conceptual categories listed above, please be sure to note under which of the areas you would prefer the paper to be placed. The Editor will contact Advisors regarding a review of the paper, and will then invite you to email the full text. On receipt, the editor will email the article out to two members of the advisory board with an assessment form to be completed (see below). If for any reason an Advisor finds that s/he is unable to review the paper, the editor will select another reader. The decision process follows the following stages: I. The two readers email their recommendations to the editor. · If both say accept the article as is, it will be accepted. · If one refuses, the editor will decide whether to refuse the article or to ask for a third reading. · If any of the readers require revision before acceptance, the suggestions for revision will be sent to the author for action. II. On receiving the revised article, the editor will re-email it to the reviewing advisors. III. Following receipt of the final recommendations of the Advisors, the Editor will forward the advisors' comments Further Notes: Advisors are asked to reveiw the paper and return their comments within three weeks of receipt. The review process is double-blind, i.e., no indication of the author's identity will be sent with the paper, and the readers' identities are also masked, unless the reader includes these details in the Comments for Author form. A copy of the complete form is posted here for your reference. This form is used as a measure for comparing advisors' assessments of papers submitted and is used primarily for that purpose, and not to determine whether the paper is accepted for publication. Please direct all correspondence regarding articles for publication in the SLS Annual Journal to: thejournal@laingsociety.org   SLS Annual Journal - Reviewer Report Form Date ms. sent: ................................. Date report is due: ......................... Ms. Number: ................................... Reviewer: .......................................... Title of ms. ................................................................................................... Topic Area(s) per Author........................................................................... Recommeded Topic Area........................................................................... Please rate the ms. on the scales below. 1 = Inadequate 2 = Major Problems 3 = Minor problems 4 = Adequate 5 = Superior or N/A = Not applicable Readability: ......................... Treatment of Relevant Literature: ......................... Appropriateness of Length ......................... Clarity of objectives: ......................... Conceptual Rigor: ......................... Methodological Rigor: ......................... Coherence of Organization: ......................... Defined Conclusion: ......................... ============================================== Please rate the mss on the scales below. 1 = None 2 = Trivial 3 = Modest 4 = Important 5 = Path-Breaking N/A = not applicable Significance of Topic: ......................... Answer one of the following: If little or no revision is needed, Significance of Contribution: ......................... If a lot of revision is needed, Potential Significance of Contribution ..................... Total (for purposes of comparison): ......................... Is the title of the paper appropriate to the content and useful to the reader? YES NO If not, what would be a better title? .......................................................................................... Is the abstract an accurate and useful summary of the content of the paper? YES NO If not, please set out the necessary revisions in your Comments to Author.   OVERALL RECOMMENDATION Check one only. [ ] Accept unconditionally [ ] Accept subject to minor revisions [ ] Encourage revision in accordance with my comments [ ] Reject in current form, but allow resubmission of a substantially different version as outlined in my comments [ ] Reject, despite some merit, because the likelihood of successful revision is remote. [ ] Reject unconditionally.   -------- COMMENT FOR THE EDITOR ---------------------   -------- COMMENT FOR THE AUTHOR --------------------       Comments and suggestions on the content and/or any problems with the display of this page would be appreciated by the webmistress. Thanks.