FAQs
Can an humanities student write an article for TTH?
Yes, provided they write about the impact of scientific development on society (including law, economics, politics).
This, put another way, is investigating the legal, social and ethical ramifications that could arise from the work of scientists (of any kind: social, biological, physical).
Investigating the impacts (even on science) of a new law, social movement, political policy or economic policy are all out.
This frequently doesn't require a broad knowledge of academic science, but does require knowledge and confidence of the science in the subject area, and the ability to critically analyse based on the evidence available. These are skills commonly associated with the sciences but are present in many disciplines (history, english, geography).
Likewise, scientists needn't be daunted; no detailed law arguments are required, though familiarity with the legal process is required when writing about legal impact.
Can you quickly summarise what happens in writing an article?
Up to three ideas thought of by writer
Checkpoint: Ideas submitted to associate editor, one in three ideas rejected
Up to two plans drafted by writer
Checkpoint: Plan submitted to associate editor, narrowed down to one plan where required
First draft written by writer
Checkpoint: First draft submitted to associate editor, editor-in-chief
Checkpoint: Checked first draft submitted for academic review
Second draft written by writer
Checkpoint: Submitted to international review
Published
At each checkpoint, the process can be ended by the writer or the editor involved. In most cases, a minor alteration is required to continue through the cycle which the editor will undertake.
What if I'm not a very good writer?
We stress that we are a very high quality print journal. This means that our articles must be fluent, well-argued, logical, well-structured and un-biased. They must have artistic flair as well as scientific rigour. The articles should also have citations to show the evidence-based method used to derive any conclusions. This, in part, should be down to the writer, but checking this guideline is always observed is up to the editor.
It is important to note that we will not print any article that does not meet our stringent selection process.
This effectively will mean that in every literary cycle, up to 20% of writers will not receive publication (in fact, some 80% of ideas will never be written about). This may seem like a lot, but we hope that this will always be by the choice of the writer to not continue with the next stage of the process – we will always explain our reasoning fully and we will always try to present a way of continuing through the cycle with slight modification. Our editors will ensure that the writer is told as early in the cycle as possible and will consequently not waste a great deal of time over us, which is why we have five checkpoints. In any event, we will also recommend other publications at Cambridge to whom they could go with their idea. Most of the 20% will fall at one of the first hurdles – the idea or plan stage. Once an article is written it would be rare for it not to reach print in some form.
If the idea is a particularly good one, then we might well ask you to try to collaborate with another, more fluent writer, so that the idea can reach print. In this case, both writers will be credited with the article, the original one with the primary authorship.
The process is a very long one, but one we must keep in place to ensure high quality and academic-level credibility.
Will we do something other than to print a journal?
Yes, we aim in future to:
Hold speaker events
Host online debate forums
Hold debate conference/seminars (principally for senior members)
And anything that falls under our remit to promote and raise the standard of debate on issues surrounding science here at Cambridge.