Login or Register to make a submission.

Author Guidelines


Contributions should conform to the PULP style guidelines. Authors are encouraged to submit their articles on the website via the submissions page but can alternatively email their submissions to


  • The submitted manuscript must be original.
  • Declaration of originality: Authors must indicate in a covering letter accompanying the manuscript that the manuscripts has not already been submitted for publication or published elsewhere.
  • Only manuscripts that have not already been submitted for publication or published elsewhere will be considered.
  • Authors must disclose all information that may be reasonably perceived to lead to a conflict of interest; and must declare any financial support related to the submitted manuscript.
  • If manuscripts are submitted by co-authors, it must be clearly indicated that all authors have significantly contributed to the research.
  • All authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes when so required by the publisher or editors.
  • All manuscripts selected through the process of double-blind peer-review will be made freely available online upon publication.
  • The copyright of articles are retained by the author/s who also retain publishing rights.
  • Manuscripts must follow the PULP style guidelines for contributors.
  • Submissions that fail to comply with the guidelines will be reverted for correction prior to the commencement of the review process.
  • No preference is given to authors from any particular institution.
  • The decision whether to publish any submission depends on whether it meets the high quality standards of PSLR and whether space is available for publication.
  • Submissions are accepted for consideration only on the basis that while the editorial board makes the final decision on publication, submissions will be subjected to appropriate peer and expert review. The editorial board further reserves the right to edit all submissions accepted for publication in terms of the editorial policy, as well as to shorten submissions if necessary.

Manuscript requirements:

  • All submissions must be in Microsoft Word (.docx) format.
  • Manuscripts will not be considered if the English is below standard.
  • In case of doubt about the correct use of the English language, authors are advised to have their text checked by a native English speaker before submission.
  • Manuscripts should average between 3 500 and 9 000 words (including footnotes) in length.
  • The author is responsible for ensuring that the manuscript remains within the word limit.
  • Authors of manuscripts must indicate their university degrees, professional qualifications and professional or academic status.
  • Authors should supply a summary of their contributions of not more than 400 words, setting out the main findings and contribution to scholarship.
  • The abstract will not be included in the overall word limit that is to not exceed 9000 words.
  • Footnotes must be numbered consecutively.
  • Footnote numbers should be in superscript without any surrounding brackets.
  • Font style and size should be at Arial 12pt, 1.5 spacing, with indented text at 11pt (relevant to quotes), and footnote text at 10pt.


  • Screening for plagiarism: The PSLR has a strict policy of screening manuscripts for plagiarism. The PSLR uses the Turnitin software to detect plagiarism prior to considering a submitted manuscript for review. Manuscripts displaying plagiarism may be rejected on this ground alone. Authors not adhering to the PRLR's policy that verbatim quotes must be clearly indicated as such may be requested to revise their articles in light of this requirement.
  • In-house substantive screening: All manuscripts then undergo an in-house substantive screening by the editorial board. Manuscripts may at this stage be rejected without undergoing anonymous peer review, on grounds such as: it falls outside the scope of the PSLR; the PULP style guidelines were not followed; the manuscript does not conform with formal submission requirements; the language use significantly impedes comprehension; the manuscript does not present a substantiated argument. Authors of manuscripts rejected at this stage are informed about the in-house screening decision.
  • Double-blind peer-review process: Selected manuscripts are then sent for anonymous peer review by at least two experts in the relevant field, for their views on whether the submitted manuscript is publishable. The peer-review process is double blind, in the sense that reviewers are not aware of authors’ identity, and authors are not aware of reviewers’ identities. Reviewers are required to engage in an objective assessment and should indicate if they have any conflict of interest. After peer review reports are received, the Editors decide on whether to invite authors to submit a revised version of the article together with a report on how authors have implemented comments from the reviewers. On receipt of the revised version, the Editors decide on whether to publish.
  • The Editors reserve the right to modify manuscripts that have successfully passed through the peer-review process, to bring them in conformity with the house style, to improve accuracy, to eliminate mistakes and ambiguity, and to bring the manuscript in line with the tenets of plain legal language.


Authors should observe high standards with respect to publication ethics as set out in the guidelines adopted by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), ( Any cases of ethical misconduct will be treated very seriously and will be dealt with in accordance with these guidelines. In the event that the PSLR, publisher, or editors are made aware of any allegation of research misconduct, the publisher or editor will investigate and act upon such allegations. When information comes to the attention of the publisher or editors of the PSLR that requires the retraction or correction of a published article, the matter must be investigated and acted upon appropriately. The PSLR is committed to publishing corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when so required, in the issue immediately following, in line with COPE guidelines.


Authors should declare if they consider that they may be reasonably perceived to have a conflict of interest in respect of the content of the manuscript they submit. The ground for the potential perception of a conflict of interest must be acknowledged in the manuscript. Editors must refrain from participating in the selection of articles about which they may reasonably be perceived to have a conflict of interest. External reviewers are expected to refrain from participating in the selection of articles about which they may be reasonably perceived to have a conflict of interest.

The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) states in its Guidelines on Good Publication Practice (2003) as follows:

‘Conflicts of interest arise when authors, reviewers, or editors have interests that are not fully apparent and that may influence their judgments on what is published. They have been described as those which, when revealed later, would make a reasonable reader feel misled or deceived.’

Conflict of interest include any personal involvement in a case or other matter related to a manuscript under consideration for publication that may reasonably perceived to lead to bias, such as having a meaningful financial interest in a related matter, having received funding, having an interest in the outcome of a case being discussed in a manuscript, or having a personal relationship.

The copyright of articles are retained by the author who also retains publishing rights.
Published editions of the PSLR may be archived by various third party content providers.

The Journal does not charge article processing fees of any kind.


Section default policy

Privacy Statement

The names and email addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party. The PSLR gathers and stores the information of authors, contributors, and peer reviewers in compliance with the Protection of Personal Information Act 4 of 2013 (POPIA). All manuscripts are anonymised and sent to at least two peer reviewers in line with the PSLR’s double-blind peer review policy. As the refereeing process is anonymous, the identity of the peer reviewers as well as the authors remains confidential and anonymous throughout the entire peer review process.