Understanding the Bigelow Institute For Consciousness Studies Essays
The Bigelow Institute for Consciousness Studies publishes essay prizes and research challenges that operate differently from typical academic calls. They have shifted significantly over the last few years from open-ended philosophical prompts toward more scientifically grounded submissions. When you look at the current criteria, the emphasis is on empirical plausibility and rigorous argumentation, not speculative metaphysics. This has changed the quality of what gets published. The practical process starts by reading the current prompt thoroughly and understanding what they are asking for before drafting anything. Most submitters skip this step and write what they want to write rather than what the prompt requires. I submitted my first essay to them years ago and received a brief rejection note that specifically mentioned the author had misunderstood the scope of the question. That feedback turned out to be accurate. The submission guidelines typically specify word count ranges, formatting requirements, and anonymization rules for blind review. They do not tolerate non-compliant formatting. If the guidelines call for double-spaced manuscript format and you submit a single-spaced PDF, your essay gets removed from consideration regardless of content quality. I learned this through direct experience when a colleague's well-written paper was discarded simply for using Times New Roman instead of the required 12-point font specification.
Here is a practical workflow that works: download the current prompt, read it once to get the general idea, then read it again with a highlighter marking every directive and constraint. Draft an outline before writing a single paragraph. Make sure each section of your outline maps directly to a requirement in the prompt. Submit a rough draft to a colleague who has not read the prompt and ask them to identify any section that does not clearly serve the stated objective. Revise everything that fails that test.
What actually wins these essays
The submissions that place consistently share specific characteristics. They are narrowly focused rather than broadly ambitious. A 4000-word essay that develops one well-supported argument through two or three sub-claims will outperform a 4000-word essay that tries to cover five different topics superficially. The reviewers read dozens of entries and they remember clear, tight arguments. Vague sweeping claims get filed away quickly. The second characteristic is engagement with existing literature in a way that demonstrates genuine familiarity, not name-dropping. I have reviewed past winning entries and the authors cite specific papers, engage with counterarguments, and reference primary sources rather than relying on secondary summaries. A single properly cited reference to a relevant peer-reviewed study carries more weight than five generalized references to well-known but poorly specified works. The third characteristic, and this is the one most submitters miss, is honest acknowledgment of limitations. Essays that present a position as fully resolved tend to fare worse than essays that present a position as provisionally supported while clearly articulating what evidence would change their conclusion. The institute values intellectual honesty over persuasive confidence.
Get the Full Details
Where this process breaks down
There are real limitations to keep in mind. The evaluation timeline is not fast. You should expect several months between submission and results announcement. The review process is not transparent about scoring rubrics, so you will never know exactly why one essay placed over another. Some submitters report that the peer review process can feel subjective, and that is an honest assessment. The institute's recent pivot toward more empirically grounded research means that purely philosophical essays face stiffer competition than they did a few years ago. If your background is in continental philosophy or speculative metaphysics, you may find the current climate less favorable than it used to be. In that case, directing your work toward philosophy of mind journals or conferences focused on consciousness studies might be a more productive use of your time. There is also a financial consideration. Some of their essay prizes involve modest monetary awards, and the time investment required to produce a competitive submission is substantial. A well-prepared essay usually takes between 40 and 80 hours of focused work depending on your familiarity with the subject area. If you are early in your academic career, weigh whether that time investment aligns with your other publication goals.
Practical specifics that matter
The submission portal requires anonymized manuscripts. Remove all identifying information including your name, institutional affiliation, and acknowledgments that reference your identity. The reviewers will check for this. I once saw an essay eliminated because the author referenced a previously published paper using first-person language that made their identity obvious even though the title page was removed. File format matters. They typically accept PDF submissions. Do not submit Word documents unless the guidelines explicitly allow them. PDF preserves formatting and prevents any possibility of accidental edits during review. I convert all my submissions to PDF immediately after the final edit pass rather than waiting until the last minute when typos in font rendering can appear. Reference style should match whatever convention the prompt specifies. If no convention is given, use the format you are most comfortable with, but use it consistently throughout. Mixed citation styles are the easiest thing for reviewers to notice and they create an impression of carelessness that hurts your chances.
