Login or Register to make a submission.

As part of the submission process, authors are required to check off their submission's compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.

  • Title page with full title and subtitle (if any). For the purposes of blind refereeing, full name of each author with current affiliation and full address/phone/email/ORCID details plus short biographical note (max. 150 words) should be supplied on a separate sheet.
  • Abstract of 150-250 words.
  • 5-8 Keywords.
  • Word count: Manuscripts should be min. 5.000 words and max. 9.000 words (not including bibliography) and written in English or Portuguese.

Submissions are read and discussed by the editorial board of DIFFRACTIONS before being sent for double-blind peer-review. Submissions are expected to fulfill certain criteria in order to be submitted to reviewers:

It is an original and scholarly article; 

It has a cultural object of analysis;

It has a clear conceptual lens or theoretical framework;

It is a close reading of the object of analysis or an original reflection on concepts and methods;

It adds to or illuminates existing research.

 

Language editing is the responsibility of the authors.

Each manuscript should contain:

1. Title page with full title and subtitle (if any). For the purposes of blind refereeing, full name of each author with current affiliation and full address/phone/email details plus short biographical note (max. 150 words) should be supplied on a separate sheet. Any reference to the author's previous work must be written in the third person.

2. Abstract of 150-250 words.

3. 5-8 Keywords.

4. Word count: Manuscripts should be min. 5.000 words and max. 9.000 words (not including footnotes and bibliography) and written in English or Portuguese.

 

Style Sheet (download it here)

Title: Subtitle

Abstract:

Please include an abstract of no more than 250 words.

 

KEYWORDS: Keyword 1; Keyword 2; Keyword 3 [please include 5 - 8 keywords]

 

  1. Introduction

Please, follow the formatting of this form and avoid additional formatting. Use Times New Roman, size 12, and 1,5 line spacing throughout the main text. The main text is indented by 2 cm to the left. The first line of a new paragraph should be indented by 1 cm, except for the first paragraph of a section.

Texts can be written either in American or British English – please be consistent throughout, remembering differences in spelling (center/centre), use of quotes (commas and periods before vs. after the quotes), and date formatting. The same goes for the different varieties of Portuguese: the journal accepts all of them, as long as the same dialect’s rules are followed in the entire document.

Please distinguish between the hyphen -; the n-dash –; and the m-dash —. To insert syntactical comments in between dashes, always use n-dashes with spaces – like in this illustration – and do not use m-dashes. To give number spans (such as dates or page numbers), use the n-dash without spaces, e.g. 1971–1988; 112–15.

Use “double” quotation marks for citations (quotations), as well as for expressions that are not citations.

Please use italics as a marker for emphasis, but sparingly, and do not use other forms of emphasis such as underlining, bold, spacing, CAPS or SMALL CAPS. Key terms in a discussion should be set in italics at first mention only. Emphasized words or phrases by the author within a quotation, should always be referenced with [emphasis mine] or [emphasis added]. Italic script should also be used to emphasize book titles, plays, films, published documents, newspapers, journals, paintings, specific words, phrases, and foreign language expressions.

  1. Headings

Label headings consistently and use bold typeface and 12pt spacing before and after the heading. Please number all headings, using Arabic numerals with a full stop: 1. Introduction. Headings never end with a full stop or colon. Do not use title capitalization for headings.

  1. Footnotes

To place and administer footnotes, use the footnote function of your word processing program only. Please use Times New Roman 10 and 1 line spacing.[1] Footnotes always end with a full stop. Titles and headings should not end with a footnote.

  1. Figures/images and tables

Please only include images to which you hold the copyright, which can be used copyright-free or for which the image copyright has been clearly resolved or settled (i.e. the author is supposed to obtain all usage rights to previously published portions of his/her contribution, including tables, figures, etc., in advance, including fees).

Place illustrations (figures, drawings, tables, and photographs) throughout the paper at the places where they are first discussed, rather than at the end of the paper. Please provide captions using Times 10 and single line spacing.

  1. Quotations

Quotations should be enclosed in “double quotation marks.” Citations within citations should be enclosed in ‘single’ quotation marks unless they are in a block quote. Longer quotations with more than 3 lines should appear as a separate indented block and should not be enclosed in quotation marks. The citation of the source should be placed at the end of the quote following the punctuation.

Block quotes should be indented by 3,5 cm. Please use Times New Roman 11 with 1 line spacing and insert a blank line before and after the quotation:

 

But let me tell you first how I conceive of the modern/colonial world system in this book. […] It is important for my argument to make a distinction between the “world system” Gunder Frank and Gills theorize and the “modern/colonial world system,” whose imaginary is the topic of this book. (Mignolo 2012, 23)

 

Please use square brackets to mark ellipsis […], changes to the original text (“[his] argument is”), or added comments (“her [i.e. Ana’s] disappointment”). Please mark added emphasis with [emphasis mine] or [emphasis added]. Please provide English or Portuguese translations (depending on the language of the article) of quotations in other languages in square brackets after the quotation. Alternatively, you may provide the English or Portuguese translation within the text and the original in the footnotes. Please mark translations made by yourself with [translation mine].  

  1. References

Please use the Chicago style with brief in-text-citations plus year (see below).

  • One author: (Benhabib 2002), (Balibar 2017, 161–62)
  • Two authors: (Hirsch and Miller 2011, 3)
  • More than two authors: (Bond et al. 2017)
  • Several works by one author: (Foucault 1994, 2008); when citing more than one work by the same author/editor published in the same year, please differentiate the works by using letters (2004a, 2004b)
  • Works by different authors: (Rothberg 2009; Erll 2011)
  • If the name is part of the sentence, the date is always given in parenthesis: In his book W.J.T. Mitchell (2015) argues …
  • Always provide the full author-date citation, do not use “ibid.,” “op. cit.,” or “loc. cit.”
  • Please do not include “ed.” or “eds.” in the in-text citations, if you cite edited works

Do not provide full sources in the footnotes, but compile a complete list of works cited (“References”) in alphabetical order at the end of your article/contribution. Author names should be repeated and not substituted by --- or —, for instance. Please note that, when available, the DOI number must be provided.

 

References

Balibar, Étienne. 2017. Citizen Subject: Foundations for Philosophical Anthropology. New York: Fordham University Press.

Balibar, Étienne. 2021. “Concept.” In Thinking with Balibar: A Lexicon of Conceptual Practice, edited by Ann Laura Stoler, Stathis Gourgouris, and Jacques Lezram, n.p. New York: Fordham University Press,

Hirsch, Marianne, and Nancy K. Miller, eds. 2011. Rites of Return: Diaspora Poetics and the Politics of Memory. New York: Columbia university Press.

Mitchell, W.J.T. 2015. Image Science: Iconology, Visual Culture, and Media Aesthetics. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.

[…]

 

Please also consider the following examples:

(source: https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/tools_citationguide/citation-guide-2.html)

 

Book:

Grazer, Brian, and Charles Fishman. 2015. A Curious Mind: The Secret to a Bigger Life. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Smith, Zadie. 2016. Swing Time. New York: Penguin Press.

D’Agata, John, ed. 2016. The Making of the American Essay. Minneapolis: Graywolf Press.

 

Chapter or part of edited book:

Thoreau, Henry David. 2016. “Walking.” In The Making of the American Essay, edited by John D’Agata, 167–95. Minneapolis: Graywolf Press.

 

Translations:

Lahiri, Jhumpa. 2016. In Other Words. Translated by Ann Goldstein. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

 

E-book:

Austen, Jane. 2007. Pride and Prejudice. New York: Penguin Classics. Kindle.

Borel, Brooke. 2016. The Chicago Guide to Fact-Checking. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ProQuest Ebrary.

Kurland, Philip B., and Ralph Lerner, eds. 1987. The Founders’ Constitution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/

 

Journal article:

Keng, Shao-Hsun, Chun-Hung Lin, and Peter F. Orazem. 2017. “Expanding College Access in Taiwan, 1978–2014: Effects on Graduate Quality and Income Inequality.” Journal of Human Capital 11, no. 1 (Spring): 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1086/690235.

LaSalle, Peter. 2017. “Conundrum: A Story about Reading.” New England Review 38 (1): 95–109. Project MUSE.

Satterfield, Susan. 2016. “Livy and the Pax Deum.” Classical Philology 111, no. 2 (April): 165–76.

 

News or magazine article:

Manjoo, Farhad. 2017. “Snap Makes a Bet on the Cultural Supremacy of the Camera.” New York Times, March 8, 2017. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/08/technology/snap-makes-a-bet-on-the-cultural-supremacy-of-the-camera.html.

Mead, Rebecca. 2017. “The Prophet of Dystopia.” New Yorker, April 17, 2017.

Pai, Tanya. 2017. “The Squishy, Sugary History of Peeps.” Vox, April 11, 2017. http://www.vox.com/culture/2017/4/11/15209084/peeps-easter.

Pegoraro, Rob. 2007. “Apple’s iPhone Is Sleek, Smart and Simple.” Washington Post, July 5, 2007. LexisNexis Academic.

 

Book review:

Kakutani, Michiko. 2016. “Friendship Takes a Path That Diverges.” Review of Swing Time, by Zadie Smith. New York Times, November 7, 2016.

 

Interview:

Stamper, Kory. 2017. “From ‘F-Bomb’ to ‘Photobomb,’ How the Dictionary Keeps Up with English.” Interview by Terry Gross. Fresh Air, NPR, April 19, 2017. Audio, 35:25. http://www.npr.org/2017/04/19/524618639/from-f-bomb-to-photobomb-how-the-dictionary-keeps-up-with-english.

 

Thesis or dissertation:

Rutz, Cynthia Lillian. 2013. “King Lear and Its Folktale Analogues.” PhD diss., University of Chicago.

 

Website content:

Bouman, Katie. 2016. “How to Take a Picture of a Black Hole.” Filmed November 2016 at TEDxBeaconStreet, Brookline, MA. Video, 12:51. https://www.ted.com/talks/katie_bouman_what_does_a_black_hole_look_like.

Google. 2017. “Privacy Policy.” Privacy & Terms. Last modified April 17, 2017. https://www.google.com/policies/privacy/.

Yale University. n.d. “About Yale: Yale Facts.” Accessed May 1, 2017. https://www.yale.edu/about-yale/yale-facts.

 

Social Media Content:

Chicago Manual of Style. 2015. “Is the world ready for singular they? We thought so back in 1993.” Facebook, April 17, 2015. https://www.facebook.com/ChicagoManual/posts/10152906193679151.

Souza, Pete (@petesouza). 2016. “President Obama bids farewell to President Xi of China at the conclusion of the Nuclear Security Summit.” Instagram photo, April 1, 2016. https://www.instagram.com/p/BDrmfXTtNCt/.

 

[1] Like this.

Review Process

1. After the author reviews and concludes the submission, the manuscript is reviewed by Diffractions' editorial board for an initial quality check to ensure that it meets the journal's requirements. The board may also determine that initial revisions must be made before sending the manuscript to peer review. The board decides whether the submission meets the journal standards, and at their discretion will choose appropriate reviewers.

2. Diffractions employes a double-blind peer review process in which neither the author nor the reviewer knows the other's identity. The comments by the reviewers are important in the editorial decision process, but a positive evaluation does not guarantee a decision to publish.

3. The board takes into account the evaluations of the peer reviewers among other considerations to decide whether to 1) accept; 2) accept with contingencies; 3) send back to revise and resubmit; or, 4) reject. In cases 2) and 3), it is possible that the manuscript will return to reviewers after revisions. 

4. The board makes the final decision on the publication of papers.

5. The board strives to process manuscripts quickly and efficiently, but due to a handful of factors, the time to decision can vary.