Law & Politics Book Review
An electronic publication of the Law and Courts
Section of the American Political Science Association
STYLE SHEET
GENERAL INFORMATION
The editor requests
that the reviewer be evaluative as well as descriptive of the contents of the
book. It is suggested that reviews open with a discussion of the topic
addressed by the book and that the reviewer identify the disciplinary
perspective of the author. Herbert Jacob created the Review to serve his
discipline, and the APSA Law and Courts Section manages and supports the
Review. Consequently, the editor encourages reviewers to devote
special attention to the political assumptions and discussions in the book
under review. Please also consider attention to the significance of the
book in light of the methodologies and approaches to the scholarly analysis or
teaching of law and courts as applied by political scientists.
Among other
topics and issues, the reviewer might wish to examine whether . . .
- the book has a clear thesis;
- the assumptions and perspective of the author are
appropriate and make sense;
- the book utilizes an appropriate methodology;
- sources are appropriate and optimally exploited;
- the book is well organized and clearly written;
- it serves its intended audience well.
Reviews of
between 1,200 and 1,500 words are usual. They can be shorter or longer,
if warranted. If a book is a collection of articles, longer reviews might
be especially necessary. The review should be concisely written and in a
lively style. It is important to be fair to the author. Be careful
not to ascribe motives unless they are explicitly admitted, and avoid the temptation of wishing that a different book had
been written. Be fair, temperate and if possible, constructive, in your
critique. However, do not pull your punches. If the book has
shortcomings, expose them. Organize your review as an essay that will
stand on its own.
If, after
receiving the book, you think the book does not merit a review, please
immediately get in touch with the editor. Professional ethics require (in the words
of the American Sociological Association) that you not review a book when an
overriding sense of personal obligation, competition, or enmity
exists. Likewise, if you find you do not have time to do the review
after all, contact the editor immediately so that the book can be
reassigned. Otherwise, the book may never be reviewed.
FORMAT
Please set up the
heading as follows:
HUMAN RIGHTS
IN AFRICA: CROSS-CULTURAL PERSPECTIVES, by Abdullahi Ahmed An-Naim and Francis M. Deng (eds).
Reviewed by James
Madison, Department of Political Science, The
Feel free to
refer to other works in your review. If you use such references, use the
style of the American Political Science Review, embedding the reference
in the text (e.g., An-Naim and Deng 1990) and placing the full citation at the
end. Please avoid footnotes entirely, and do not number pages. Please
place titles in UPPER case, rather than italics, and do not use
underlining.
TRANSMISSION
The Review staff
prefers to receive your review as an attachment to an e-mail message in MSWord
or Wordperfect format (addressed to wmcintosh@gvpt.umd.edu), or you
may send an ASCII (text) version of the review in the body of an ordinary
e-mail message. You may also submit the review as a Microsoft Word for
Macintosh file or, if necessary and absolutely unavoidable, in laser-printed
form.
The editor
reserves the right to edit reviews for style, conciseness, consistency,
punctuation, and racist or sexist language. You will receive an edited
version of your review to revise and approve before publication. Reviewers
can secure copyright to their reviews.
*****************************************************************************
301.405.4156 or 4134 , FAX: 301.314.9690 , E-Mail: wmcintosh@gvpt.umd.edu
Website: http://www.bsos.umd.edu/gvpt/lpbr/
Office: Department of Government &
Politics ,
Editorial Board:
Charles R. Epp,
Wayne D. Moore, Virginia Polytechnic
Institute and