Advice from Policy & Politics journal on how to choose the right journal for your research 

by Kristin Taylor (co-editor), Elizabeth Koebele (co-editor) & Allegra Fullerton (Digital Associate Editor) 

At the recent journal editors’ roundtable at the Conference on Policy Process Research in January 2026 in Bern, Switzerland, we were struck by the number of scholars seeking advice on how to choose the best journal to publish their research in. So, we thought we’d follow up with our top tips on choosing where to publish. Ultimately, the choice of whether a paper is accepted for review or not is at the discretion of the editorial team; however, there are ways to increase your odds of your work being selected to go under review, whether at Policy & Politics or elsewhere.  

Firstly, check if your paper aligns within the aims and scope of the journal you are considering. Astonishingly, Policy & Politics desk rejects around 75% of submissions every year primarily due to their lack of fit with our aims and scope. Such rejections are largely avoidable by rigorously reading journal aims, scope, and other summaries or editorial statements on journals’ webpages. It is also worth reviewing the last several months of publications from the journal. Your submission may be more likely to be sent out for review if it engages in or extends an ongoing discourse in the journal, including pointing to areas that need further attention. Journals track debates on issues within their scope over time, so if your research questions are responding to a debate already ongoing in the journal – partly indicated through citations of appropriate articles in your references – you stand a much better chance of your article passing the desk reject stage. 

Continue reading

Updating your course reading lists? Check out our essential reading recommendations for Public Policy and Politics courses on emotions in public policy, the politics of environmental policy, and governance networks

by Sarah Brown and Allegra H. Fullerton

As you plan reading lists for the coming academic year, this collection of recent articles offers fresh insights for units on emotions in public policy, the politics of environmental policy, and governance networks. Each article draws on cutting-edge empirical research combined with conceptual innovation, making them ideal for both undergraduate and postgraduate modules exploring the politics of policymaking.

We hope these suggestions save you time and effort in mining recent articles while ensuring your course materials reflect the latest research from the frontiers of the discipline.

Continue reading

Social identities, emotions and policy preferences

by Johanna Hornung and Nils C. Bandelow


How do individuals form policy preferences? In our recent article, published in Policy & Politics, we argue that individuals’ identification with social groups, and the emotions associated with these groups, can explain why people support certain policies to address societal problems. Specifically, we investigate this connection using two examples from one of the most complex problems of our time: climate change.  

Climate change puts pressure on governments around the world. There are multiple public policies that aim to reduce harmful carbon dioxide emissions, such as promoting meatless nutrition or reducing the use of individual cars for transport. These policies not only need the approval of political elites but must be supported by people and their individual preferences. 

In public policy research, insights from social psychology are drawn on, because they offer valuable insights into how individuals think and behave. Explanations for preferences within this field primarily focus on cognitive aspects, such as social group affiliations and emotions experienced. Building on this strand of research, we propose that individuals’ policy preferences are influenced by the social groups they identify with, and the emotions they associate with their own groups and others. More specifically, individuals are likely to support policies aligned with the values and norms of their social group, especially if they harbour strong negative emotions toward opposing groups. For instance, when considering preferences towards meatless diets, we expect individuals who identify as vegetarians to be more supportive of such policies, particularly if they feel strong negative emotions (such as anger) towards non-vegetarians. Similarly, in the context of individual car use, those who own a car are expected to favour policies promoting individual car use as a means of transport, especially if they feel strong negative emotions towards people who do not drive cars. 

Continue reading