Download the Economics and Philosophy instructions for contributors here: (248 KB)

Download the Instructions for Preparation of the Final Version of an Accepted Article here:  (108KB)

EAP 2017 annual report on submissions and editorial decisions (50 KB).

To view the PDF files linked above, you will need Adobe Acrobat Reader.

Aims and Scope

The disciplines of economics and philosophy each possess their own special analytical methods, the combination of which is powerful and fruitful. Economics and Philosophy seeks to promote the mutual enrichment of the two disciplines by publishing high-quality original research in all contemporary areas linking them, as well as relevant book reviews. Economics and Philosophy only publishes articles that engage with issues that are of interest to both economists and philosophers.  Topics include, but are not limited to, the foundations of rational or behavioral decision theory and game theory, the nature of rationality in general, issues at the intersection of economics with moral, political, and social philosophy, experimental research on economics and philosophy, and the philosophy and methodology of economics. Articles that employ mathematics must be written in such a way that they are accessible to readers with limited formal training. Economics and Philosophy does not publish historical or text-interpretive work unless it makes a contribution to current debates about economics and philosophy.

Peer review

Economics and Philosophy uses a double-blind model of peer review.

Editorial Policies

1. The Editors prefer papers of fewer than 12,000 words and may return longer papers to their authors without a review with a request that they be resubmitted in shorter form.

2. The Editors will consider short comments on or replies to papers published in Economics and Philosophy.  Comments and replies are expected to make a significant contribution to the literature in their own right. In case of a reply, the author of the original paper will be allowed to publish a short response (up to 300 words) alongside the reply.

3. Unsolicited book reviews are not considered.

4. The Editors of Economics and Philosophy are committed to double blind refereeing.  With double blind refereeing, the identity of an author is known to all of the Editors, but not to the referees.  The identity of a referee is known to the Editors, but not to the author unless the referee has waived his or her anonymity.

If a submitted paper is closely related to previous work of the author or if arguments that have been developed previously by him or her are appealed to, then the paper must include a discussion of how it relates to this previous work.  The Editors recognize that there are limited circumstances in which this requirement warrants an exception to the double-blind policy.

In most cases, an author can refer to his or her earlier work in an anonymized version of the paper without self-identifying.  If an author does not believe that the paper can be anonymized so as to conceal his or her identity, a non-anonymized version may be submitted for review together with an explanation as to why it is not possible to anonymize the paper without self-identifying.  If the Editors agree with this assessment, then the non-anonymized version will be reviewed. Otherwise, the paper will be returned for anonymizing. 

If an author is invited to submit a revision and it will not be sent out for a further external review, then the Editors may ask for the revision to be non-anonymized.

5. The editorial team consists of four Editors, the Book Review Editor, and the Managing Editor.  On a rotating basis, one of the Editors is designated as the Lead Editor.

Upon receipt of a submission, the Lead Editor reviews the paper to determine whether it should be assigned to one of the Editors, including him- or herself, for further consideration or rejected without an external review.  Authors of rejected papers will be provided with a reason for the rejection.

The decision letter is written by the Editor in charge of the paper.  It and any external reviews received are circulated to the other Editors for comment before the decision is conveyed to the author.

6. Any advice received from referees will be taken into account when making an editorial decision.  However, the ultimate responsibility for a decision rests with the Editors and it may differ from what has been recommended by the referees.

Any report received from a referee will be forwarded to the author in full.  The Editors should not be taken to endorse the content or tone of any referee’s report.

Referees will be informed of the editorial decision.  The contents of the decision letter and the other referees’ reports received may be shared with a referee in whole or in part in a redacted form that preserves the anonymity of the author and the referees.  However, when a final decision has been made on a submission, the referees will be informed of the author’s identity.

7. An author who is invited to prepare a revision will be given a time limit for submitting it.  Any paper not resubmitted by this time is considered to have been withdrawn.  Currently, this deadline is eight months for a first revision.  Subsequent revisions and papers for a symposium are generally given shorter deadlines.

8. Statistics about submissions and editorial decisions, including the acceptance rate and information about the length of time taken to make editorial decisions, is provided in an Annual Report.  The latest Annual Report may be downloaded here.

Article Types

Economics & Philosophy publishes:

• Article*
• Book Review
• Critical Notice*
• Discussion Article*
• Reply
• Symposium Article*
• Symposium Introduction*