Engaging Science, Technology, and Society will publish material in the following genres:

  • Individual Research Articles:  (Double-blind Peer-reviewed) Single- or co-authored original research articles.  Here we will consider theoretical papers and empirical studies.  High value will be placed on research that provides conceptually guided analysis of empirical data.
  • Thematic Collections:  (Double-blind Peer-reviewed) Single- or co-authored original research articles submitted as part of a group of papers organized by a specific STS theme (on the order of a "special issue").
  • Considering Concepts: (Double-blind Peer-reviewed) The aim of these 2k-word essays is to introduce a concept of potential use in the analysis of broadly STS-related issues.  Such essays should introduce the key concept, give a single empirical illustration of its use and describe how the concept might profitably be extended. Please note:
  1. We expect the presentation of new concepts or of concepts that while an author or others have characterized the concept in other publications, the "Considering Concept" submission constitutes significant further development of the concept;
  2. We will consider submissions where the author has already developed the concept elsewhere in cases where the submitted essay applies the concept to new empirical terrain and can make a compelling case that this new empirical application adds scholarly value;
  3. We will not accept verbatim excerpts from published work, and one way or another we except at least 50% of the content of the submission to be new.  We recognize that "new" may be hard to define precisely, but we are looking for original submissions, not retreaded scholarship.
  • Debates/ Interactions: (Double-blind Peer-reviewed) We seek to promote debates within the “pages” of Engaging Science, Technology, and Society.  Where reviewers and the editors believe debate on one of our accepted, full-length research articles is warranted, we will seek commentators and provide the article author an opportunity to respond.  In addition, we welcome proposals for debate themes and possible participants.  Here we will ask several authors to write 5k-word essays on the debate theme.
  • Review Essays:  (Double-blind Peer-reviewed)  5k-word review essays on themes of significant interest to STS scholars and people beyond the STS community.
  • Critical Engagements:  (Double-blind Peer-reviewed) Approximately 1K-word papers that critically consider a problem and offer a kind of extended op-ed where an STS lens enables the author to analyze a topical problem.  We seek jargon-free essays, no or minimal references/notes, and we encourage use of in-text links for further exploration.  We seek essays that use the scholarly tools and expertise of the writer to consider matters that are "in the news" or matters of active public discussion.  We seek jargon-free essays, akin to opinion-oriented long-form journalism.   Below are two examples of the kinds of work we are interested in.    One of these pieces is longer than the 1K length we are seeking, but it is a good example of the kind of substance in which we are interested.  No references or notes, and we encourage use of in-text links for further exploration. 
  1. Honeybees Under Threat by Daniel Lee Kleinman & Sainath Suryanarayanan
  2. Can an Algorithm be Wrong? by Tarleton Gillespie
  • Traces: (Peer-reviewed by the Editorial Board and occasionally another external scholar) Invited 6k-word essays by prominent scholars asked to (re)trace their intellectual paths and discuss the experiences that led them to STS and to particular set of interests, empirical foci, or concepts.