Example of Perspectives on Politics format
Recent searches

Example of Perspectives on Politics format Example of Perspectives on Politics format Example of Perspectives on Politics format Example of Perspectives on Politics format Example of Perspectives on Politics format Example of Perspectives on Politics format Example of Perspectives on Politics format Example of Perspectives on Politics format Example of Perspectives on Politics format Example of Perspectives on Politics format Example of Perspectives on Politics format Example of Perspectives on Politics format Example of Perspectives on Politics format
Sample paper formatted on SciSpace - SciSpace
This content is only for preview purposes. The original open access content can be found here.
Look Inside
Example of Perspectives on Politics format Example of Perspectives on Politics format Example of Perspectives on Politics format Example of Perspectives on Politics format Example of Perspectives on Politics format Example of Perspectives on Politics format Example of Perspectives on Politics format Example of Perspectives on Politics format Example of Perspectives on Politics format Example of Perspectives on Politics format Example of Perspectives on Politics format Example of Perspectives on Politics format Example of Perspectives on Politics format
Sample paper formatted on SciSpace - SciSpace
This content is only for preview purposes. The original open access content can be found here.
open access Open Access
recommended Recommended

Perspectives on Politics — Template for authors

Categories Rank Trend in last 3 yrs
Political Science and International Relations #19 of 556 -
journal-quality-icon Journal quality:
High
calendar-icon Last 4 years overview: 149 Published Papers | 780 Citations
indexed-in-icon Indexed in: Scopus
last-updated-icon Last updated: 17/07/2020
Related journals
Insights
General info
Top papers
Popular templates
Get started guide
Why choose from SciSpace
FAQ

Related Journals

open access Open Access

Taylor and Francis

Quality:  
High
CiteRatio: 1.9
SJR: 0.688
SNIP: 0.981
open access Open Access
recommended Recommended

Taylor and Francis

Quality:  
High
CiteRatio: 1.2
SJR: 0.25
SNIP: 1.893
open access Open Access

Taylor and Francis

Quality:  
High
CiteRatio: 0.7
SJR: 0.171
SNIP: 2.17
open access Open Access

Taylor and Francis

Quality:  
High
CiteRatio: 2.3
SJR: 0.538
SNIP: 1.239

Journal Performance & Insights

Impact Factor

CiteRatio

Determines the importance of a journal by taking a measure of frequency with which the average article in a journal has been cited in a particular year.

A measure of average citations received per peer-reviewed paper published in the journal.

2.398

3% from 2018

Impact factor for Perspectives on Politics from 2016 - 2019
Year Value
2019 2.398
2018 2.326
2017 1.642
2016 3.234
graph view Graph view
table view Table view

5.2

33% from 2019

CiteRatio for Perspectives on Politics from 2016 - 2020
Year Value
2020 5.2
2019 3.9
2018 3.3
2017 4.9
2016 4.2
graph view Graph view
table view Table view

insights Insights

  • Impact factor of this journal has increased by 3% in last year.
  • This journal’s impact factor is in the top 10 percentile category.

insights Insights

  • CiteRatio of this journal has increased by 33% in last years.
  • This journal’s CiteRatio is in the top 10 percentile category.

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR)

Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP)

Measures weighted citations received by the journal. Citation weighting depends on the categories and prestige of the citing journal.

Measures actual citations received relative to citations expected for the journal's category.

2.898

41% from 2019

SJR for Perspectives on Politics from 2016 - 2020
Year Value
2020 2.898
2019 2.059
2018 2.213
2017 2.075
2016 2.79
graph view Graph view
table view Table view

2.663

21% from 2019

SNIP for Perspectives on Politics from 2016 - 2020
Year Value
2020 2.663
2019 2.202
2018 2.032
2017 2.347
2016 2.91
graph view Graph view
table view Table view

insights Insights

  • SJR of this journal has increased by 41% in last years.
  • This journal’s SJR is in the top 10 percentile category.

insights Insights

  • SNIP of this journal has increased by 21% in last years.
  • This journal’s SNIP is in the top 10 percentile category.

Perspectives on Politics

Guideline source: View

All company, product and service names used in this website are for identification purposes only. All product names, trademarks and registered trademarks are property of their respective owners.

Use of these names, trademarks and brands does not imply endorsement or affiliation. Disclaimer Notice

Cambridge University Press

Perspectives on Politics

Perspectives on Politics seeks to provide a space for broad and synthetic discussion within the political science profession and between the profession and the broader scholarly and reading publics. Such discussion necessarily draws on and contributes to the scholarship publis...... Read More

Political Science and International Relations

Social Sciences

i
Last updated on
17 Jul 2020
i
ISSN
1537-5927
i
Impact Factor
Very High - 3.416
i
Open Access
No
i
Sherpa RoMEO Archiving Policy
Green faq
i
Plagiarism Check
Available via Turnitin
i
Endnote Style
Download Available
i
Bibliography Name
unsrt
i
Citation Type
Numbered
[25]
i
Bibliography Example
G E Blonder, M Tinkham, and T M Klapwijk. Transition from metallic to tunneling regimes in superconducting microconstrictions: Excess current, charge imbalance, and supercurrent conversion. Phys. Rev. B, 25(7):4515–4532, 1982. 10.1103/PhysRevB.25.4515.

Top papers written in this journal

Journal Article DOI: 10.1017/S1537592704040472
Informal institutions and comparative politics: a research agenda
Gretchen Helmke1, Steven Levitsky2
01 Dec 2004 - Perspectives on Politics

Abstract:

Mainstream comparative research on political institutions focuses primarily on formal rules. Yet in many contexts, informal institutions, ranging from bureaucratic and legislative norms to clientelism and patrimonialism, shape even more strongly political behavior and outcomes. Scholars who fail to consider these informal rul... Mainstream comparative research on political institutions focuses primarily on formal rules. Yet in many contexts, informal institutions, ranging from bureaucratic and legislative norms to clientelism and patrimonialism, shape even more strongly political behavior and outcomes. Scholars who fail to consider these informal rules of the game risk missing many of the most important incentives and constraints that underlie political behavior. In this article we develop a framework for studying informal institutions and integrating them into comparative institutional analysis. The framework is based on a typology of four patterns of formal-informal institutional interaction: complementary, accommodating, competing, and substitutive. We then explore two issues largely ignored in the literature on this subject: the reasons and mechanisms behind the emergence of informal institutions, and the nature of their stability and change. Finally, we consider challenges in research on informal institutions, including issues of identification, measurement, and comparison.Gretchen Helmke's book Courts Under Constraints: Judges, Generals, and Presidents in Argentina, will be published by Cambridge University Press. Steven Levitsky is the author of Transforming Labor-Based Parties in Latin America: Argentine Peronism in Comparative Perspective and is currently writing a book on competitive authoritarian regimes in the post–Cold War era. The authors thank the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs at Harvard University and the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at the University of Notre Dame for generously sponsoring conferences on informal institutions. The authors also gratefully acknowledge comments from Jorge Dominguez, Anna Grzymala-Busse, Dennis Galvan, Goran Hyden, Jack Knight, Lisa Martin, Hillel Soifer, Benjamin Smith, Susan Stokes, Maria Victoria Murillo, and Kurt Weyland, as well as three anonymous reviewers and the editors of Perspectives on Politics. read more read less

Topics:

Institutional analysis (56%)56% related to the paper, Comparative politics (56%)56% related to the paper, International studies (54%)54% related to the paper, Clientelism (53%)53% related to the paper, Politics (52%)52% related to the paper
View PDF
2,220 Citations
Journal Article DOI: 10.1017/S1537592707070491
Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences
Sheri Berman1
01 Mar 2007 - Perspectives on Politics

Abstract:

Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. By Alexander L. George and Andrew Bennett. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2005. 331p. 20.00 paper.In recent years, there has been a surge in work on what has come to be known as “qualitative methods.” The trend is essentially reactive, developing as a response to the outp... Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. By Alexander L. George and Andrew Bennett. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2005. 331p. 20.00 paper.In recent years, there has been a surge in work on what has come to be known as “qualitative methods.” The trend is essentially reactive, developing as a response to the outpouring of work on quantitative and formal methods and the assertions by scholars in those areas that case studies and historical work are impressionistic, unscientific, and noncumulative. To counter such claims, some of the field's most distinguished qualitative scholars (e.g., Stephan Van Evera, Guide to Methods for Students of Political Science, 1997; James Mahoney and Dietrich Rueschemeyer, eds., Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences, 2003; and Marc Trachtenberg, The Craft of International History, 2006) have spent much time and ink to show that researchers who eschew regressions or game theory can be just as methodologically aware and sophisticated as those who embrace them. Alexander George and Andrew Bennett's Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences is an impressive and welcome addition to this literature. read more read less

Topics:

Social studies (55%)55% related to the paper, Social philosophy (54%)54% related to the paper, Social psychology (sociology) (53%)53% related to the paper, Social science education (53%)53% related to the paper, Social complexity (51%)51% related to the paper
1,800 Citations
open accessOpen access Journal Article DOI: 10.1017/S1537592714001595
Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens
Martin Gilens1, Benjamin I. Page
01 Sep 2014 - Perspectives on Politics

Abstract:

Each of four theoretical traditions in the study of American politics—which can be characterized as theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy, Economic-Elite Domination, and two types of interest-group pluralism, Majoritarian Pluralism and Biased Pluralism—offers different predictions about which sets of actors have how mu... Each of four theoretical traditions in the study of American politics—which can be characterized as theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy, Economic-Elite Domination, and two types of interest-group pluralism, Majoritarian Pluralism and Biased Pluralism—offers different predictions about which sets of actors have how much influence over public policy: average citizens; economic elites; and organized interest groups, mass-based or business-oriented. A great deal of empirical research speaks to the policy influence of one or another set of actors, but until recently it has not been possible to test these contrasting theoretical predictions against each other within a single statistical model. We report on an effort to do so, using a unique data set that includes measures of the key variables for 1,779 policy issues. Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence. The results provide substantial support for theories of Economic-Elite Domination and for theories of Biased Pluralism, but not for theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy or Majoritarian Pluralism. read more read less

Topics:

Pluralism (political theory) (59%)59% related to the paper, Democracy (51%)51% related to the paper, Public policy (51%)51% related to the paper
View PDF
1,437 Citations
Journal Article DOI: 10.1017/S1537592707070065
When Multiplication Doesn't Equal Quick Addition: Examining Intersectionality as a Research Paradigm
Ange-Marie Hancock1
01 Mar 2007 - Perspectives on Politics

Abstract:

In the past twenty years, intersectionality has emerged as a compelling response to arguments on behalf of identity-based politics across the discipline. It has done so by drawing attention to the simultaneous and interacting effects of gender, race, class, sexual orientation,andnationaloriginascategoriesofdifference.Intersec... In the past twenty years, intersectionality has emerged as a compelling response to arguments on behalf of identity-based politics across the discipline. It has done so by drawing attention to the simultaneous and interacting effects of gender, race, class, sexual orientation,andnationaloriginascategoriesofdifference.Intersectionalargumentsandresearchfindingshavehadvaryinglevelsof impact in feminist theory, social movements, international human rights, public policy, and electoral behavior research within political science and across the disciplines of sociology, critical legal studies, and history. Yet consideration of intersectionality as a research paradigm has yet to gain a wide foothold in political science. This article closely reads research on race and gender across subfields of political science to present a coherent set of empirical research standards for intersectionality. read more read less

Topics:

Intersectionality (60%)60% related to the paper, Feminist theory (54%)54% related to the paper, Social movement (53%)53% related to the paper, Politics (52%)52% related to the paper, Critical legal studies (51%)51% related to the paper
View PDF
1,334 Citations
Journal Article DOI: 10.1017/S1537592704770978
Rising Tide: Gender Equality and Cultural Change Around the World
Peggy Kahn1
01 Jun 2004 - Perspectives on Politics

Abstract:

Rising Tide: Gender Equality and Cultural Change Around the World.
1,130 Citations
Author Pic

SciSpace is a very innovative solution to the formatting problem and existing providers, such as Mendeley or Word did not really evolve in recent years.

- Andreas Frutiger, Researcher, ETH Zurich, Institute for Biomedical Engineering

Get MS-Word and LaTeX output to any Journal within seconds
1
Choose a template
Select a template from a library of 40,000+ templates
2
Import a MS-Word file or start fresh
It takes only few seconds to import
3
View and edit your final output
SciSpace will automatically format your output to meet journal guidelines
4
Submit directly or Download
Submit to journal directly or Download in PDF, MS Word or LaTeX

(Before submission check for plagiarism via Turnitin)

clock Less than 3 minutes

What to expect from SciSpace?

Speed and accuracy over MS Word

''

With SciSpace, you do not need a word template for Perspectives on Politics.

It automatically formats your research paper to Cambridge University Press formatting guidelines and citation style.

You can download a submission ready research paper in pdf, LaTeX and docx formats.

Time comparison

Time taken to format a paper and Compliance with guidelines

Plagiarism Reports via Turnitin

SciSpace has partnered with Turnitin, the leading provider of Plagiarism Check software.

Using this service, researchers can compare submissions against more than 170 million scholarly articles, a database of 70+ billion current and archived web pages. How Turnitin Integration works?

Turnitin Stats
Publisher Logos

Freedom from formatting guidelines

One editor, 100K journal formats – world's largest collection of journal templates

With such a huge verified library, what you need is already there.

publisher-logos

Easy support from all your favorite tools

Perspectives on Politics format uses unsrt citation style.

Automatically format and order your citations and bibliography in a click.

SciSpace allows imports from all reference managers like Mendeley, Zotero, Endnote, Google Scholar etc.

Frequently asked questions

1. Can I write Perspectives on Politics in LaTeX?

Absolutely not! Our tool has been designed to help you focus on writing. You can write your entire paper as per the Perspectives on Politics guidelines and auto format it.

2. Do you follow the Perspectives on Politics guidelines?

Yes, the template is compliant with the Perspectives on Politics guidelines. Our experts at SciSpace ensure that. If there are any changes to the journal's guidelines, we'll change our algorithm accordingly.

3. Can I cite my article in multiple styles in Perspectives on Politics?

Of course! We support all the top citation styles, such as APA style, MLA style, Vancouver style, Harvard style, and Chicago style. For example, when you write your paper and hit autoformat, our system will automatically update your article as per the Perspectives on Politics citation style.

4. Can I use the Perspectives on Politics templates for free?

Sign up for our free trial, and you'll be able to use all our features for seven days. You'll see how helpful they are and how inexpensive they are compared to other options, Especially for Perspectives on Politics.

5. Can I use a manuscript in Perspectives on Politics that I have written in MS Word?

Yes. You can choose the right template, copy-paste the contents from the word document, and click on auto-format. Once you're done, you'll have a publish-ready paper Perspectives on Politics that you can download at the end.

6. How long does it usually take you to format my papers in Perspectives on Politics?

It only takes a matter of seconds to edit your manuscript. Besides that, our intuitive editor saves you from writing and formatting it in Perspectives on Politics.

7. Where can I find the template for the Perspectives on Politics?

It is possible to find the Word template for any journal on Google. However, why use a template when you can write your entire manuscript on SciSpace , auto format it as per Perspectives on Politics's guidelines and download the same in Word, PDF and LaTeX formats? Give us a try!.

8. Can I reformat my paper to fit the Perspectives on Politics's guidelines?

Of course! You can do this using our intuitive editor. It's very easy. If you need help, our support team is always ready to assist you.

9. Perspectives on Politics an online tool or is there a desktop version?

SciSpace's Perspectives on Politics is currently available as an online tool. We're developing a desktop version, too. You can request (or upvote) any features that you think would be helpful for you and other researchers in the "feature request" section of your account once you've signed up with us.

10. I cannot find my template in your gallery. Can you create it for me like Perspectives on Politics?

Sure. You can request any template and we'll have it setup within a few days. You can find the request box in Journal Gallery on the right side bar under the heading, "Couldn't find the format you were looking for like Perspectives on Politics?”

11. What is the output that I would get after using Perspectives on Politics?

After writing your paper autoformatting in Perspectives on Politics, you can download it in multiple formats, viz., PDF, Docx, and LaTeX.

12. Is Perspectives on Politics's impact factor high enough that I should try publishing my article there?

To be honest, the answer is no. The impact factor is one of the many elements that determine the quality of a journal. Few of these factors include review board, rejection rates, frequency of inclusion in indexes, and Eigenfactor. You need to assess all these factors before you make your final call.

13. What is Sherpa RoMEO Archiving Policy for Perspectives on Politics?

SHERPA/RoMEO Database

We extracted this data from Sherpa Romeo to help researchers understand the access level of this journal in accordance with the Sherpa Romeo Archiving Policy for Perspectives on Politics. The table below indicates the level of access a journal has as per Sherpa Romeo's archiving policy.

RoMEO Colour Archiving policy
Green Can archive pre-print and post-print or publisher's version/PDF
Blue Can archive post-print (ie final draft post-refereeing) or publisher's version/PDF
Yellow Can archive pre-print (ie pre-refereeing)
White Archiving not formally supported
FYI:
  1. Pre-prints as being the version of the paper before peer review and
  2. Post-prints as being the version of the paper after peer-review, with revisions having been made.

14. What are the most common citation types In Perspectives on Politics?

The 5 most common citation types in order of usage for Perspectives on Politics are:.

S. No. Citation Style Type
1. Author Year
2. Numbered
3. Numbered (Superscripted)
4. Author Year (Cited Pages)
5. Footnote

15. How do I submit my article to the Perspectives on Politics?

It is possible to find the Word template for any journal on Google. However, why use a template when you can write your entire manuscript on SciSpace , auto format it as per Perspectives on Politics's guidelines and download the same in Word, PDF and LaTeX formats? Give us a try!.

16. Can I download Perspectives on Politics in Endnote format?

Yes, SciSpace provides this functionality. After signing up, you would need to import your existing references from Word or Bib file to SciSpace. Then SciSpace would allow you to download your references in Perspectives on Politics Endnote style according to Elsevier guidelines.

Fast and reliable,
built for complaince.

Instant formatting to 100% publisher guidelines on - SciSpace.

Available only on desktops 🖥

No word template required

Typset automatically formats your research paper to Perspectives on Politics formatting guidelines and citation style.

Verifed journal formats

One editor, 100K journal formats.
With the largest collection of verified journal formats, what you need is already there.

Trusted by academicians

I spent hours with MS word for reformatting. It was frustrating - plain and simple. With SciSpace, I can draft my manuscripts and once it is finished I can just submit. In case, I have to submit to another journal it is really just a button click instead of an afternoon of reformatting.

Andreas Frutiger
Researcher & Ex MS Word user
Use this template