Cambridge University Press is celebrating a milestone with the publication of over 2000 Cambridge Elements, a unique format in academic publishing between a book and a journal article with a length of 20,000-30,000 words.
Launched in 2019, Cambridge Elements offer original, succinct, and peer-reviewed research from leading scholars. Interdisciplinary and exploratory, they provide comprehensive coverage of key topics in disciplines spanning the arts and sciences.
Cass R. Sunstein, Harvard Professor of Law and author of an Element in Public Economics, said of Cambridge Elements: “The Elements series is an international treasure. In a way, it’s a whole world. A standing ovation to all those who have made it possible.”
Chris Harrison, Cambridge’s Publishing Director of HSS books, said: “This growth shows the huge appetite amongst scholars for writing up high quality peer-reviewed research at the length Elements offers.
“The 6.8 million and counting downloads show how much readers enjoy reading content of this length, too!”
Chris co-developed the idea for Cambridge Elements along with his Cambridge colleague, Phil Meyler, Publishing Director of STM books.
"When Phil and I pitched the idea for a new format that took advantage of the capabilities of our then new(ish) platform Cambridge Core, and that was midway between a journal article and a monograph, I don't think either of us imagined we would be celebrating publication of the 2000th Element so soon!”
Phil reflected on why the Cambridge Elements were created, and the ongoing need that they serve.
“One of the prime motivations in launching the Elements program was to provide a vehicle for types of academic work that wouldn't otherwise find a published outlet,” said Phil.
“I believe that we’ve succeeded in that aim, and seen an extraordinarily positive response from a broad spectrum of scholarly, technical, and clinical communities.
“The Elements program continues to be an excellent example of the importance of listening to, and responding to, the needs of our customers.”
What the editors say – accessible, student-friendly and practical
In celebration of the 2000th Cambridge Element’s publication, Cambridge asked series editors – many of whom are leading academics - about their experiences and perspectives on working to publish Cambridge Elements.
“One of the highlights has been feedback saying how useful the series is for teaching. This is one of the ambitions we had for the series when we started it, and now the list covers so many areas of the field. It is proving to be a useful tool for introducing students to the many diverse and exciting subjects within it.” - Samantha J. Rayner and Leah Tether, Series Editors of Cambridge Elements in Publishing and Book Culture
“I wanted to recruit a diverse range of authors and give proper representation to the many women now working in a traditionally male-dominated field. And I wanted the volumes to be accessible to as wide an audience as possible.” - Dr Keith Frankish, Series Editor of Cambridge Elements in Philosophy of the Mind
“What I like about the format is that whenever I write a journal article, it is quite short, and you can’t really get into much detail. But trying to write a book is such a major undertaking that it takes years to complete. It’s nice to have a format somewhere in the middle to fill that gap.” – Rupert Till, Series Editor of Cambridge Elements in Popular Music
What is the 2000th Element?
The 2000th Cambridge Element is Elitism versus Populism: Experiments on the Dual Threat to American Democracy by Curtis Bram, an assistant professor of political science at the University of Texas at Dallas.
Incisive and timely, this Element explores whether the trust that advocates of elitist democracy feel towards political elites is misplaced. In five experiments with local politicians, state legislators and members of the public, Bram identified a similar willingness across all groups to entrench their party’s power when given the opportunity – a self-serving majoritarianism transcending partisan lines.
Bram also found that this tendency is strongest among committed ideologues, politicians running in highly competitive districts, and those who perceive opponents as especially threatening.