Journal submission

Ross Woods, 2021

This is a draft procedure for journal article submissions.
It is issued without warranty of any kind whatsoever. It is not unusual except that it is free to use on a creative commons licence.
This license lets others distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the work, even commercially, as long as they give credit for the original creation.

 
Scope of Journal

The scope of the WXYZ Journal the journalis the field of ….

Articles

The journal accepts unsolicited manuscripts for articles if they are accompanied by the Application form.

Criteria for acceptance of articles

  1. The article is within the scope of the journal.
  2. The article makes an original contribution to research in the field of the journal.
  3. The article is written for a scholarly audience of other researchers, colleagues, and specialists in the field.
  4. The title accurately reflects the topic of the article.
  5. Authors are listed with email address and name of institution(s).
  6. The title page and body follow the WXYZ templates current at the time.
  7. It contains an abstract of no more than 400 words, and contains:
    1. Topic
    2. Significance
    3. Methodology
    4. Results
    5. Implications
    6. Keywords (maximum 10 words)
  8. The maximum length of an article is c. 5000 words.
  9. The outine of contents are as follows*:
    1. Title and author
    2. Abstract
    3. Introduction, containing purpose or problem statement
    4. Literature review
    5. Methodology or research design
    6. Results with analysis or discussion
    7. Conclusion
    8. Implications (including suggested future research on the topic)
    9. References with complete bibliographic details
    10. Appendices (Optional)
  10. All acronyms and abbreviations are defined when first mentioned.
  11. The manuscript is an editable .docx file. Figures may be .jpg, .tiff, or .png. (Articles submitted in hard copy are not acceptable.)
  12. The manuscript is free of typographical errors, tracking changes and edits, and watermarks.
  13. Language:
    1. is concise and clear,
    2. is in formal English,
    3. uses US spelling, and
    4. uses good grammar, punctuation, and style.
  14. Facts are accurate.
  15. References use the prescribed Harvard system.
  16. All figures and tables are clear and informative with accompanying legends.
  17. The article meets ethical guidelines regarding:
    1. any applicable research ethics (e.g. required permissions, conflicts of interest, non-defamation)
    2. plagiarism, including self-plagiarism.
  18. The journal may require an institutional ethical clearance (e.g. for research on human or animal subjects, food, medications, medical therapies).
  19. The article is suitable to be a public document, for example:
    1. It is understandable to the public audience for which it is intended.
    2. It may contain fair critique but not unfair disparagement.
    3. It contains no confidential information.
    4. It presents no risk of litigation.
  20. If the article is subsequently found to contain substantial deficiencies of any kind, the journal is entitled at its disgressions to print either an apology or a full retraction.
  21. The journal is submitted with the author form. (See Application form below.)

[*Article outlines vary between disciplines. Some journals prescribe an outline and section titles, but many do not.]

Authorship

  1. lf the article has mutiple authors, they shall be listed in alphabetical order of surname.
  2. All persons who played a significant role in producing the article must be listed as authors.
    1. Honorary authorships are not permitted, that is, those who did not have a significant role, such as non-writing advisors and heads of departments.
    2. Ghost authorships are not permitted. A ghost author is an individual makes a substantial contribution to the article but is not listed as an author. They must be listed as authors.

Review procedure: Articles

  1. In the first instance, the editor will evaluate the article.
    1. The editor may take any steps necessary to authenticate the identity of the authors and the article, including plagiarism checks.
    2. At this stage, the editor may choose to reject the article or return it to the author for correction and resubmission.
    3. The journal aims to return a decision to the author on the editor's decision within seven days.
  2. If the article passes this evaluation, the editor will decide whether it will be sent for an initial peer review or directly for a full peer review.
  3. The initial peer review shall be done by one person.
    1. The author(s) will be blind to the identify of the reviewer.
    2. The reviewer will be blind to the identify of the author(s).
    3. The reviewer may choose to recommend publication, rejection, or that article be returned to the author for correction and resubmission.
    4. The reviewer should return a recommendation to the editor within seven days.
  4. The full peer review shall be done by three persons.
    1. The author(s) will be blind to the identify of the reviewer.
    2. The reviewers will be blind to the identify of the author(s).
    3. The reviewers should return a recommendation to the editor within fourteen days.
  5. The reviewers may choose to recommend publication, rejection, or that article be returned to the author for correction and resubmission.
  6. The journal will publish the article will be only if at least two of the reviewers give positive recommendations.
  7. The journal aims to inform the author of the decision on publication within one month of reciept of the article.

Book reviews

The journal does not accept unsolicited manuscripts for book reviews.

Criteria

  1. The book is well-chosen for its relevance to the scope of the journal, for example:
    1. It is within the scope of the journal.
    2. It was published very recently.
    3. It makes a significant, original contribution to literature in the field of the journal.
  2. The review contains:
    1. The author's main purpose for writing the book
    2. A clear overview of the main points of the book
    3. Any points necessary to understanding the perspective of the book (e.g. the authors’ background, the intended audience)
    4. An evaluation or critique
    5. Complete bibliographic details
  3. Length is from 300 to 500 words.

Review procedure

  1. In the first instance, the editor will evaluate the article.
    1. The editor may take any steps necessary to authenticate the identity of the authors and the article, including plagiarism checks.
    2. At this stage, the editor may choose to reject the article or return it to the author for correction and resubmission.
    3. The journal aims to return a decision to the author on the editor's decision within seven days.
  2. If the article passes this evaluation, the editor will send it to a reviewer.
  3. This review shall be done by one person.
    1. The author(s) will be blind to the identify of the reviewer.
    2. The reviewer will be blind to the identify of the author(s).
  4. The reviewer may choose to recommend publication, rejection, or that article be returned to the author for correction and resubmission.
  5. The reviewer should return a recommendation to the editor within seven days.

Conflict of interest

Conflict of interest can affect the acceptability of articles. For example, a commercial organization funds a research organization to evaluate a product in development. Researchers might then produce a biased outcome that is favorable to the commercial organization. In effect, it is a marketing exercise; the commercial organization would then quote the research article as evidence of the product's efficacy.

 
Draft author form contents

Application form

Instructions
  1. If an item is not applicable to your article, write N/a. Do not leave it blank.
  2. If more than one person had a significant role in the production of the article, then each one must fill this form.
  3. Address: An institutional address may be used.
  4. Your institution: Optional.
Name of author    
Address    
Email address    
Name of your institution    
Your institution's website    
Title of the article    
Date of completion of the article    
Actual or perceived conflicts of interest    
Specified contribution of each co-author    
Acknowledgement of research funding    
Declaration
  1. I am the author (or one of the authors) of the submitted work.
  2. I am the copyright holder (or one of the copyright holders) on the submitted work.
  3. I have seen and approve the final version of the article before it is submitted.
  4. I understand that the journal and its reviewers do not provide services in editing and proof-reading.
  5. I agree that the WXYZ Journal will not be liable to pay or reimburse me in any way whatsoever.
  6. I have checked facts in the article and confirm them to be correct.
  7. The article has not already been published elsewhere and is not currently under consideration for publication elsewhere.
  8. I hereby waive my right to withdraw the article.
  9. If WXYZ Journal accepts the article for publication:
    1. I approve and authorize publication of the article in the WXYZ Journal, including to display the full text of the article to the public immediately.
    2. I approve the terms of publication.
    3. Copyright will remain with the author.
    4. The article will be published with the Creative Commons license (Attribution-Non-commercial-No derivs).
Date 
Signature 

Appendix: Appointment of reviewers

  1. The Journal may appoint reviewers by either invitation or by application.
  2. Whether by invitation or by application, prospective reviewers must accept the position in writing.
  3. Reviewers must have at least one of the following credentials:
    1. An earned, accredited qualification in the field of the journal.
    2. A faculty member of an accredited institution of higher institution.
    3. A research position in a recognized research institute.
  4. The journal may ask reviewers for their area(s) of specialist expertise within the journal's field of study.
  5. The journal shall verify the credential(s) by any means necessary before appoinmtnent.
  6. Reviewers are responsible to maintain current expertise in the journal's field of study.

Other

See also Guide to the Journal Publishing Practices and Standards (JPPS) framework