Search the Lounge

Categories

« Wake Forest Law Invites Nominations & Applications for Dean | Main | Jim Crow Trivia Question »

November 30, 2014

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

James Grimmelmann

It doesn't take an empirical study to know that an abstract and table of contents are worth including. They're courtesies to readers, and that ought to suffice.

Former Editor

I agree about the abstract, not so sure that every article should have a table of contents. If it's a forty plus pager, including a TOC makes sense. I've seen 15 to 25 page submissions with one, though, which just seems silly.

AnonR

Considering Word and other editing programs now make creating a Table of Contents automatic given your headings, there doesn't seem to be any reason not to include one. If the editors choose to take it out for space / formatting / consistency, so be it, but it isn't any extra work. It also often helps me see the structure of my own work better.

Anon

It is pretty rare to see a Table of Contents in other disciplines and their presence in Law Reviews is really just a sign that the articles are way too long. Books have Table of Contents, articles don't. Abstracts obviously make sense but sometimes they are as long as an article would be, again a function of trying to draw the uninformed Law Review editor in.

The comments to this entry are closed.

StatCounter

  • StatCounter
Blog powered by Typepad