Dear Dr. Qwerty:
When a target article or recent book has been accepted for BBS Open Peer Commentary, the editorial office sends out the Call for Commentary Proposals to thousands of people. Commentary proposals help the editors craft a well-balanced commentary invitation list. Please DO NOT submit a commentary article unless you are formally invited.
If this target article interests you as a possible subject for commentary, please download the full un-copyedited preprint to see if you would like to *propose* a commentary.
If you are interested, carefully follow the instructions below the target article information. Please keep in mind that we are not asking you to submit a commentary article -- but rather, a short proposal in order to be considered as an invited author after the proposal deadline. Also be aware that we typically receive far more commentary proposals than we can accommodate with formal invitations.
NOW PROCESSING COMMENTARY PROPOSALS ON:
Target Article: "Subtracting 'Ought' From 'Is': Descriptivism Versus Normativism in the Study of the Human Thinking"
Authors: Shira Elqayam and Jonathan St.B.T. Evans
Deadline for Commentary Proposals: February 1, 2011
Abstract: We propose a critique of normativism, defined as the idea that human thinking reflects a normative system against which it should be measured and judged. We analyze the methodological problems associated with normativism, proposing that it invites the controversial is-ought inference, much contested in the philosophical literature. This problem is triggered when there are competing normative accounts (the arbitration problem), as empirical evidence can help arbitrate between descriptive theories, but not between normative systems. Drawing on linguistics as a model, we propose that clear distinction between normative systems and competence theories is essential, arguing that equating them invites an 'is-ought' inference; to wit, supporting normative 'ought' theories with empirical 'is' evidence. We analyze in detail two research programs with normativist features, Oaksford and Chater's rational analysis, and Stanovich and West's individual differences approach,
demonstrating how in each case equating norm and competence leads to an is-ought inference. Normativism triggers a host of research biases in psychology of reasoning and decision making: focusing on untrained participants and novel problems, analyzing psychological processes in terms of their normative correlates, and neglecting philosophically significant paradigms when they do not supply clear standards for normative judgment. For example, in a dual-process framework, normativism can lead to a fallacious 'ought-is' inference, in which normative responses are taken as diagnostic of analytic reasoning. We propose that little can be gained from normativism that cannot be achieved by descriptivist computational-level analysis, illustrating our position with Hypothetical Thinking Theory and the theory of the suppositional conditional. We conclude that descriptivism is a viable option, and that theories of higher mental processing would be better off freed from normative
considerations.
Keywords: Bayesianism; competence; computational level analysis; descriptivism; is-ought inference; logicism; normative systems; normativism; rational analysis; rationality; research bias; understanding/acceptance principle
Download Target Article Preprint:
http://journals.cambridge.org/BBSJournal/Call/Elqayam_preprint
COMMENTARY PROPOSALS *MUST* INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING
1. What aspect of the target article or book you would anticipate commenting on.
2. The relevant expertise you would bring to bear on the target article or book.
Please include names and affiliations of your co-authors, if applicable, in the text of your commentary proposal.
SUGGESTING COMMENTATORS AND NOMINATING BBS ASSOCIATES
Commentators must be BBS Associates, or suggested by a BBS Associate. If you are not a BBS Associate, please follow the instructions below. To suggest others as possible Commentators, or to nominate others for BBS Associateship status, please email bbsjournal(a)cambridge.org.
http://journals.cambridge.org/BBSJournal/Inst/Assoc
HOW TO SUBMIT A COMMENTARY PROPOSAL
If you would like to nominate yourself for potential commentary invitation, you must submit a Commentary Proposal via our BBS Editorial Manager site:
1. Log-in as Author
Username: CQwerty-545
Password: Qwerty875632
Log-in to your BBS Editorial Manager account as an author: http://www.editorialmanager.com/bbs.
If you do not have an account, please visit the site and register. You can also submit a request for missing username and password information if you have an existing account.
2. Submit New Manuscript
Within your author main menu please select Submit New Manuscript.
3. Select Article Type
Choose the article type of your manuscript from the pull-down menu. Commentary Proposal article types are temporarily created for each accepted target article or book. Only select the Commentary Proposal article type that you wish to submit a proposal on. For example; "Commentary Proposal (Elqayam)"
4. Enter Title
Please title your proposal submission by indicating the relevant first author name of the target article or book. For example: "Commentary Proposal on Elqayam"
5. Add Co-Authors
If you are proposing to write a commentary with any co-authors, the system will not allow you to enter their information here. Instead, include their names in the commentary proposal document you upload. These potential co-authors need not contribute to the Commentary Proposal itself.
6. Attach Files
The only required submission Item is your Commentary Proposal in MSWord or RTF format. In the Description field please add the first author name of the target article or book. For example: "Commentary Proposal on Elqayam"
7. Approve Your Submission
Editorial Manager will process your Commentary Proposal submission and will create a PDF for your approval. On the "Submissions Waiting for Author's Approval" page, you can view your PDF, edit, approve, or remove the submission. (You might have to wait several minutes for the blue "Action" menu to appear, allowing you to approve. Once you have Approved the Submission, the PDF will be sent to the editorial office.
**It is VERY important that you check and approve your Commentary Proposal manuscript as described above. Otherwise, we cannot process your submission.**
8. Editorial Office Decision
At the conclusion of the Commentary Proposal period, the editors will review all the submitted Commentary Proposals. An undetermined number of Commentary Proposals will be approved and those author names will be added to the final commentary invitation list. At that time you will be notified of the decision. If you are formally invited to submit a commentary, you will be asked to confirm your intention to submit by the commentary deadline.
Note: Before the commentary invitations are sent, the copy-edited and revised target article will be posted for invitees. In the case of Multiple Book Review, invitees will be sent a copy of the book to be commented upon if requested. With Multiple Book Reviews, it is the book, not the précis article that is the target of commentary.
Please do not write a commentary unless you have received an official invitation!
BEING REMOVED FROM THE CALL EMAIL LIST
If you DO NOT wish to receive Call for Commentary Proposals in the future, please reply to bbsjournal(a)cambridge.org, and type "remove" in the subject line.
Sincerely,
Ralph DeMarco
Editorial Administrator, BBS
Associate Editor, STM Journals
Cambridge University Press
32 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10013-2473
Tel 001 212.337.5016
bbsjournal(a)cambridge.org
http://journals.cambridge.org/bbshttp://bbs.edmgr.com/
~ Call for Papers ~
Joint Meeting of the
Society for Philosophy and Psychology and the
European Society for Philosophy and Psychology
6-10 July 2011
Université du Québec à Montréal , Montreal, Canada
Papers may be submitted for oral or poster presentation. Submitted papers are refereed and selected on the basis of quality and relevance to philosophy, psychology and other sciences of the mind.
https://www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=spp2011
Submissions should be tailored to one of the following formats:
1. Philosophy Talks
Papers must not exceed a length of 3,500 words and should be accompanied by an abstract (of less than 300 words).
2. Psychology Talks
An abstract of not more than 1000 words should be accompanied by short abstract (of less than 300 words).
3. Posters (only) in any discipine
An abstract of not more than 500 words.
We welcome submissions in all related areas, including but not limited to the other sciences of the mind. Authors working in those areas should select the most appropriate submission format. Submitted papers/abstracts that are not accepted for oral presentation will automatically be considered for presentation as posters (unless the author stipulates otherwise).
Papers and abstracts must be written in a format appropriate for anonymous review and employ gender-neutral language. Individual authors may submit only one paper or abstract as first author, though they may be co-authors on other submissions.
This year's submission deadline is 15 February 2011.
All submissions will be made using our online submission system, which is now open. Check the website for details.
http://www.socphilpsych.org/CFP.html <http://www.socphilpsych.org/CFP.html>
Invited Speakers for the 2011 joint meeting include: In addition to addresses by the presidents of the the societies, Louise Antony (SPP) and Noami Eilan (ESPP), there will be three plenary speakers, Ned Block, Barbara Landau, and the Stanton Prize winner.
There will be five symposia. The topics for which will include generics (with Sarah-Jane Leslie), language acquisition (with Lila Gleitman), numerosity (with Justin Halberda) and a discussion of Susan Carey's recent book, Concepts.
For more information about the SPP/ESPP conference, please consult the website.
http://www.socphilpsych.org/CFP.html <http://www.socphilpsych.org/CFP.html>
The Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences at Stanford University (CASBS) will soon be accepting applications for residential fellowships during the 2012-2013 academic year. Should this be of interest to you, you should plan to submit your online application via our website to be considered for a residential fellowship.
This sabbatical fellowship provides an excellent opportunity for faculty to pursue priority research and expand their horizons while engaging in a diverse, interdisciplinary community. CASBS offers a supportive, stimulating, and peaceful environment. A CASBS fellowship award is considered a career milestone for any scholar, and most recipients report that the year had a transformative effect on later work.
Online applications will be accepted at the Center’s website from February 2 – April 6, 2011 for the 2012-2013 residential fellowship program year. For more information about CASBS’ residential fellowship program, including application guidelines and requirements, visit www.casbs.org.
If there is a future year that would work better for you, feel free to check our website in January of the year before the year you are interested in (e.g., January 2012 for the 2013-14 fellowship year).
Should you have any questions about our fellowship program that aren't answered on our website, please contact the CASBS Secretary at secretary(a)casbs.stanford.edu.
Sincerely,
Stephen Kosslyn Linda Jack
CASBS Director Associate Director
Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences at Stanford University
75 Alta Road, Stanford CA 94305
tel: 650-321-2052 web: www.casbs.org
Dear List Members,
We would like to call your attention to our Summer Program which will
take place in 2011 in Budapest. Financial aid is available. Please share
this information with your students, professors and fellow colleagues
who may find it an interesting and useful study opportunity.
--------------------
Central European University is a US-style, internationally recognized
institution of post-graduate education in the social sciences and
humanities. Its summer school (June 6-July 29, 2011) is a program in
English for graduate students, university teachers, researchers and
professionals in the social sciences and humanities. It draws its
student body of around 500 participants annually from more than 60
countries and its faculty from over 30 countries.
In 2011 the summer school (http://www.summer.ceu.hu) offers 19
high-level, research-oriented, interdisciplinary academic courses as
well as workshops on policy issues for professional development, taught
by internationally renowned scholars and policy experts (including CEU
faculty). Application from all over the world is encouraged. Financial
aid is available.
The general application deadline is February 15, 2011. More information
about the application process is available at www.summer.ceu.hu/apply
and the relevant course web sites.
We are looking forward to receiving your applications.
Summer University Office
1051 Budapest, Nádor u. 9.
Hungary
Tel.: (36-1) 327-3811
Fax: (36-1) 327-3124
The first talk of 2011 in the CDC seminar series will be given by:
Sandra Waxman, Northwestern University
Date: MONDAY, January 17, 5 PM
Cognitive Development Center, Hattyú u. 14, 3rd floor
*EARLY WORD LEARNING: LINKING INFANTS' LINGUISTIC AND CONCEPTUAL ADVANCES
*
Abstract: Word learning stands at the cross-road between linguistic and
conceptual organization. To learn the meaning of a word, infants must set
their sights in two distinct directions. Facing the conceptual domain, they
must form core concepts to capture the various relations among the objects
and events that they encounter. Facing the linguistic domain, they must cull
words and phrases from the melody of the human language in which they are
immersed. Decades of research have revealed that even before they begin to
speak, infants’ advances in each of these domains are powerfully linked. I
will review this evidence, focusing first on infants on the threshold of
word learning and then moving on present new evidence from infants as young
as 3- and 4-months of age.
_______________________________________________
Subscribe by sending an empty mail to seminars-subscribe(a)cdc.ceu.hu
Unsubscribe by sending an empty mail to seminars-unsubscribe(a)cdc.ceu.hu
KONFERENCIAFELHÍVÁS
A Kaposvári Egyetem Társadalomtudományi Tanszéke a Magyar Kognitív Tudományi
Alapítvánnyal közösen konferenciát szervez
Az észlelés természete
címmel.
A konferencia ideje: 2011. január 27-29.
A konferencia helyszíne: Kaposvári Egyetem, Pedagógiai Kar. (Kaposvár, 7400
Guba Sándor utca 40.)
A konferenciára való jelentkezés meghosszabbított határideje: 2011. január10.
A konferenciára való jelentkezéseket a xix.makog(a)gmail.com címre kérjük.
A konferencia szervezői:
Tőzsér János jantozser(a)gmail.com
Bács Gábor bacs.gabor2(a)gmail.com
Molnár Gábor molnar.gabor(a)ke.hu
--
L a s z l o E. S z a b o
Professor of Philosophy
DEPARTMENT OF LOGIC, INSTITUTE OF PHILOSOPHY
EOTVOS UNIVERSITY, BUDAPEST
http://phil.elte.hu/leszabo
Minden erdeklodot szeretettel meghivunk a 16. Latas Szimpozium most szombaton megrendezesre kerulo esemenyere. Reszletes program terv alabb, tovabbi reszletes informacio pedig a szimpozium web oldalan ezen a cimen.
https://sites.google.com/site/latasszimpozium2010/
A Szervezok.
***********************************************************************************************************
TIZENHATODIK MAGYAR LÁTÁS SZIMPÓZIUM
2010 december 18
Semmelweis Egyetem, ÁOK Anatómiai Intézet Könyvtára
1094 Budapest, Tűzoltó u. 58.
https://sites.google.com/site/latasszimpozium2010/
PROGRAMTERV
9:50
MEGNYITO
Fényinger detektálás
10:00
Kusnyerik Ákos, Resch Miklós, Süveges Ildikó, Németh János
Retina implantátumok hazai klinikai vizsgálatában alkalmazott betegkiválasztási szempontok valamint a tervezett tesztek bemutatása
Magyar Bionikus Látásközpont, Szemészeti Klinika, Semmelweis Egyetem, Budapest;
10:15
Némethné Vidovszky Ágnes, Schanda János
A világosság észlelet látásfiziológiai alapjai
Pannon Egyetem
Tapintható, hallható látás
10:30
Kisvárday Zoltán, Martinecz Bernadett
Látókérgi neuronhálózatok anatómiai térképezése retrográd vírustracerekkel
DEOEC, Debreceni Egyetem, Anatómiai, Szövet- és Fejlődéstani Intézet
10:45
Négyessy L, Ashaber M, Pálfi E, Palmer C, Friedman RM, Chen LM, Roe AW
Funkcionális modulok neuronális összeköttetései: Mit látunk a szomatoszenzoros kéregben?
MTA – PPKE - SE Neuro-Infobionika Kutatócsoport
11:00
Kaposvári Péter, Csete Gergő, Csibri Péter, Tompa Tamás, Sáry Gyula
Bimodális integráció a majom inferotemporális kérgében
SZTE Általános Orvostudományi Kar, Élettani Intézet, Szeged
11:15
SZUNET
Macskásodó jelfeldogozás
11:30
Gombkötő Péter, Berényi Antal, Utassy Györgyi, Benedek György, Nagy Attila
A térbeli vizuális információ kódolása a nucleus caudatusban
SZTE Általános Orvostudományi Kar, Élettani Intézet, Szeged
11:45
Buzás, P., Petykó, Z., Kóbor, P., Telkes, I., Lénárd, L.
"Kék-sárga" színopponens válaszok a macska corpus geniculatum laterale magjában
Pécsi Tudományegyetem, Általános Orvostudományi Kar, Élettani Intézet, Pécs
Arccal a zajok felé
12:00
Bankó Éva, Gál Viktor, Körtvélyes Judit, Kovács Gyula, Vidnyánszky Zoltán
A zaj a szenzoros feldolgozáson mért hatásának és a döntéshozatal nehézségének szétválasztása
PPKE-ITK
12:15
Zimmer Márta, Gregor Volberg, Vidnyánszky Zoltán, Kovács Gyula
A feladat-irreleváns inger-koherencia meghatározza az arc – zaj interakciót: egy EKP vizsgálat
MTA-BME Kognitív Tudományi Kutatócsoport
12:30
SZUNET
EBÉD
Előrekódolt és fejlődő funkciók
2:15
Csibra Gergely, Przemek Tomalski, Mark Johnson
Gyors szemmozgás a szemre jellemző kontraszt információt tartalmazó arcszerű ábrák felé
CEU
2.30
Mikó E., Markó K., Budai A., Dani T., Gyenge M. és Jandó G.
A binokularitás vizsgálata statikus és dinamikus véletlen pont E sztereo-grammokkal az óvodás-bölcsődés populációban
PTE-ÁOK Élettani Intézet
Nem hiszek a szememnek
2:45
Nádasdy Zoltán
A látszólagos mozgás mint posztdiktív interpoláció.
Seton Brain and Spine Institute, University Medical Center at Brackenridge and
Department of Psychology, University of Texas at Austin
3:00
Szabó Eszter, Krajcsi Attila
A szubitizáció alakzatérzékenysége
ELTE, Kognitív Pszichológiai Tanszék
3:15
Braunitzer Gábor, Kéri Szabolcs
Mozgásirány-érzékelés: szükséges-e a primer látókéreg?
SZTE-ÁOK Élettani Intézet
3:30
SZUNET
Alacsony és magas folyamatok mérése
3:45
Magos Tibor
Pislogást kísérő bioelektromos agyi jelenségek vizsgálata LORETA és VEP módszerekkel
Pannon Egyetem
4:00
Győri-Dani Dóra, Rokszin Adrienn, Linnert Szilvia, Krajcsi Attila, Csifcsák Gábor, Tompa Tamás
A vizuális kategorizációs folyamatok elektrofiziológiai korrelátumai
Szegedi Tudományegyetem, Bölcsésztudományi Kar, Pszichológia Intézet
Elmélet – kódolás- modellezés
4:15
Lengyel Máté, Orbán Gergő
Mintavételezés a látókéregben: a neurális variabilitás és a spontán aktivitás magyarázata
University of Cambridge
4:30
A. Lőrincz, Zs. Palotai, and G. Szirtes
A metabolikusan hatékony „sparse coding” „no-noise” modellje: amit a jelvisszaállitas elárul a korai vizuális feldolgozásról
ELTE
4:45
SZIMPOZIUM ZÁRÁS
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Tisztelt Kollégák!
A szervezo"k nevében szeretném tisztelettel meghívni Önöket a
"Perceptual Bistability" szimpóziumra, amely a Cognition at Christmas
sorozat keretében kerül megrendezésre.
A szimpózium ido"pontja: 2010. december 15. (szerda)
Helyszín: BME K épület I. em. 66. terem (Oktatói Klub)
Honlap (program, absztraktok, ingyenes regisztráció):
http://cogsci.bme.hu/~ktkuser/PERCEPTUAL%20BISTABILITY/index.html
Szervezo"k: Kovács Ilona, Winkler István, Bo"hm Tamás
Minden érdeklo"do"t szeretettel várunk.
Üdvözlettel,
Bo"hm Tamás
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 5699 (20101213) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com
Dear Dr. Qwerty:
When a target article or recent book has been accepted for BBS Open Peer Commentary, the editorial office sends out the Call for Commentary Proposals to thousands of people. Commentary proposals help the editors craft a well-balanced commentary invitation list. Please DO NOT submit a commentary article unless you are formally invited.
If this target article interests you as a possible subject for commentary, please download the full un-copyedited preprint to see if you would like to *propose* a commentary.
If you are interested, carefully follow the instructions below the target article information. Please keep in mind that we are not asking you to submit a commentary article -- but rather, a short proposal in order to be considered as an invited author after the proposal deadline. Also be aware that we typically receive far more commentary proposals than we can accommodate with formal invitations.
NOW PROCESSING COMMENTARY PROPOSALS ON:
Target Article: "Bayesian Fundamentalism or Enlightenment? On the Explanatory Status and Theoretical Contributions of Bayesian Models of Cognition"
Authors: Matt Jones and Bradley C. Love
Deadline for Commentary Proposals: January 10, 2011
Abstract: Bayesian modeling of cognition has undergone a recent rise in prominence, due largely to mathematical advances in specifying and deriving predictions from complex probabilistic models. Much of this research aims to demonstrate that cognitive behavior can be explained from rational principles alone, without recourse to psychological or neurological processes and representations. We note commonalities between this rational approach and other movements in psychology, namely Behaviorism and Evolutionary Psychology, that set aside mechanistic explanation or make use of optimality assumptions. Through these comparisons, we identify a number of challenges that limit the rational program's potential contribution to psychological theory. Specifically, rational Bayesian models are significantly unconstrained, both because they are uninformed by a wide range of process-level data and because their assumptions about the environment are generally not grounded in empirical
measurement. The psychological implications of most Bayesian models are also unclear. Bayesian inference itself is conceptually trivial, but strong assumptions are often embedded in the hypothesis sets and the approximation algorithms used to derive model predictions, without a clear delineation between psychological commitments and implementational details. Comparing multiple Bayesian models of the same task is rare, as is the realization that many Bayesian models recapitulate existing (mechanistic-level) theories. Despite the expressive power of current Bayesian models, we argue they must be developed in conjunction with mechanistic considerations to offer substantive explanations of cognition. We lay out several means for such an integration, which take into account the representations on which Bayesian inference operates, as well as the algorithms and heuristics that carry it out. We argue this unification will better facilitate lasting contributions to
psychological theory, avoiding the pitfalls that have plagued previous theoretical movements.
Keywords: Bayesian modeling, cognitive processing, levels of analysis, rational analysis, representation
Download Target Article Preprint:
http://journals.cambridge.org/BBSJournal/Call/M_Jones_preprint
COMMENTARY PROPOSALS *MUST* INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING
1. What aspect of the target article or book you would anticipate commenting on.
2. The relevant expertise you would bring to bear on the target article or book.
Please include names and affiliations of your co-authors, if applicable, in the text of your commentary proposal.
SUGGESTING COMMENTATORS AND NOMINATING BBS ASSOCIATES
Commentators must be BBS Associates, or suggested by a BBS Associate. If you are not a BBS Associate, please follow the instructions below. To suggest others as possible Commentators, or to nominate others for BBS Associateship status, please email bbsjournal(a)cambridge.org.
http://journals.cambridge.org/BBSJournal/Inst/Assoc
HOW TO SUBMIT A COMMENTARY PROPOSAL
If you would like to nominate yourself for potential commentary invitation, you must submit a Commentary Proposal via our BBS Editorial Manager site:
1. Log-in as Author
Username: CQwerty-545
Password: Qwerty875632
Log-in to your BBS Editorial Manager account as an author: http://www.editorialmanager.com/bbs.
If you do not have an account, please visit the site and register. You can also submit a request for missing username and password information if you have an existing account.
2. Submit New Manuscript
Within your author main menu please select Submit New Manuscript.
3. Select Article Type
Choose the article type of your manuscript from the pull-down menu. Commentary Proposal article types are temporarily created for each accepted target article or book. Only select the Commentary Proposal article type that you wish to submit a proposal on. For example; "Commentary Proposal (M. Jones)"
4. Enter Title
Please title your proposal submission by indicating the relevant first author name of the target article or book. For example: "Commentary Proposal on M. Jones"
5. Add Co-Authors
If you are proposing to write a commentary with any co-authors, the system will not allow you to enter their information here. Instead, include their names in the commentary proposal document you upload. These potential co-authors need not contribute to the Commentary Proposal itself.
6. Attach Files
The only required submission Item is your Commentary Proposal in MSWord or RTF format. In the Description field please add the first author name of the target article or book. For example: "Commentary Proposal on M. Jones"
7. Approve Your Submission
Editorial Manager will process your Commentary Proposal submission and will create a PDF for your approval. On the "Submissions Waiting for Author's Approval" page, you can view your PDF, edit, approve, or remove the submission. (You might have to wait several minutes for the blue "Action" menu to appear, allowing you to approve. Once you have Approved the Submission, the PDF will be sent to the editorial office.
**It is VERY important that you check and approve your Commentary Proposal manuscript as described above. Otherwise, we cannot process your submission.**
8. Editorial Office Decision
At the conclusion of the Commentary Proposal period, the editors will review all the submitted Commentary Proposals. An undetermined number of Commentary Proposals will be approved and those author names will be added to the final commentary invitation list. At that time you will be notified of the decision. If you are formally invited to submit a commentary, you will be asked to confirm your intention to submit by the commentary deadline.
Note: Before the commentary invitations are sent, the copy-edited and revised target article will be posted for invitees. In the case of Multiple Book Review, invitees will be sent a copy of the book to be commented upon if requested. With Multiple Book Reviews, it is the book, not the précis article that is the target of commentary.
Please do not write a commentary unless you have received an official invitation!
BEING REMOVED FROM THE CALL EMAIL LIST
If you DO NOT wish to receive Call for Commentary Proposals in the future, please reply to bbsjournal(a)cambridge.org, and type "remove" in the subject line.
Sincerely,
Ralph DeMarco
Editorial Administrator, BBS
Associate Editor, STM Journals
Cambridge University Press
32 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10013-2473
Tel 001 212.337.5016
bbsjournal(a)cambridge.org
http://journals.cambridge.org/bbshttp://bbs.edmgr.com/