Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Journal of the European Royal Society (JERSY) publishes fundamental challenges (to paradigms) in biology, chemistry, geology and physics. Theories conceived without or prior to data analysis are unacceptable. Manuscripts with more than three co-authors are also unacceptable. Sole-authorship and submissions previously rejected by Nature or Science magazines for obviously political reasons, such as going through refereeing process but getting rejected without a scientific explanation, are particularly welcome. Brief historical overviews of fundamental scientific theories and paradigms are also welcome.

Submitted articles must contain solid evidence in favor of the proposed fundamental shift. Such evidence may include: demonstration of new laws or disproof of the currently accepted ones, derivation of fundamental equations, discovery of new compounds or principles, development of new medication drugs, etc.  In brief, this journal is about classical merit alone. There are no fees to submit or to publish.

 

Section Policies

Paradigm

Editors
  • Anonymous per policy
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Biology

Editors
  • Anonymous per policy
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Chemistry

Editors
  • Anonymous per policy
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Geology

Editors
  • Anonymous per policy
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Physics

Editors
  • Anonymous per policy
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Letters to Editor

Editors
  • Anonymous per policy
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

All submissions are peer-reviewed. To ensure full-blind peer-review, names of editors and referees are kept anonymous to the public and to each other. Authors are guaranteed confidentiality and privacy. Editors and referees must not belong to any formal or informal groups of editors. Names of referees are published in the subsequent volume in alphabetical order, except withheld ones. JERSY will not be submitted to arbitrary rating schemes so it will never have any "impact factors" as those by definition prevent paradigm shifts.  The current rejection rate should not be discouraging – rather it should motivate you to submit your best work.

 

Publication Frequency

Instantly (online).

Annually (print).

 

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate (free) open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

 

Archiving

We encourage research librarians to join other libraries and list this journal among their library's electronic journal holdings. This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system and permits libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration only if the libraries strictly abide by the journal's policies and standards.

After a rather unpleasant experience with the Georgetown University and its library in 2013, the Society has decided to implement constant monitoring (of outlets which list or wish to list this journal) for compliance with the journal's policies and standards.

 

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Journal of the European Royal Society publishes original research papers focused on fundamental biology, chemistry, geology, and physics. Submitted work has neither been published elsewhere in any language, nor is it under review for publication anywhere. This following statement clarifies ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the editor, the reviewer, and the publisher (European Royal Society - ERS).

Duties of Authors

  1. Reporting Standards: Authors should present an accurate account of the original research performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Researchers should present their results honestly and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation. A manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Manuscripts should follow the submission guidelines of the journal.
  2. Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original work. The manuscript should not be submitted concurrently to another publication unless the editors have agreed to co-publication. Relevant previous work and publications, both by other researchers and the authors’ own, should be properly acknowledged and referenced. The primary literature should be cited where possible. Original wording taken directly from publications by other researchers should appear in quotation marks with the appropriate citations.
  3. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications: Author should not in general submit the same manuscript to another journal concurrently. It is also expected that the author will not publish redundant manuscripts or manuscripts describing same research elsewhere. Submitting the same manuscript to another journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Multiple publications arising from a single research project should be clearly identified as such and the primary publication should be referenced.
  4. Acknowledgement of Sources: Authors should acknowledge all sources of data used in the research and cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given.
  5. Authorship of the Paper: The authorship of research publications should accurately reflect individuals’ contributions to the work and its reporting. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to conception, design, execution or interpretation of the reported study. Others who have made significant contribution must be listed as co-authors. In cases where major contributors are listed as authors, those who made less substantial, or purely technical contributions to the research or to the publication are listed in an acknowledgement section. Authors also ensure that all the authors have seen and agreed to the submitted version of the manuscript and their inclusion of names as co-authors.
  6. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors should clearly disclose in their manuscript and on ERS forms (available on this Web site during submission process) any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project(s) should be disclosed.
  7. Fundamental Errors in Published Works: If the authors discover a significant error or inaccuracy in the submitted manuscript, then the authors should promptly notify the journal editor or publisher, and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
  8. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects: The authors should clearly identify in the manuscript if the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use. Human or animal subjects used in or/and for described research, must also be clearly identified along with the methodology and standards applied.

 

Duties of the Editor

  1. Publication Decisions: Based on the review report of the editorial board, the editor can accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may not confer with section editors or reviewers in making this decision. All editors have to take responsibility for everything they agree to be published, and should have procedures and policies in place to ensure the quality of the material they publish and maintain the integrity of the published record.
  2. Review of Manuscripts: The editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the appropriate section editor for originality. The editor should organize and use peer-review fairly and wisely. Editors should explain their peer-review processes in the information for authors and also indicate which parts of the journal are peer reviewed. Editor should use appropriate peer-reviewers for papers that are considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.
  3. Fair Play: Editors must not know each other personally or have the same employer. Those editors responsible for the manuscript must not know any of its authors personally. The editor must ensure that each manuscript received by the journal is reviewed for its intellectual content without regard to sex, gender, race, religion, ethnicity, citizenship, language barriers, etc. of the authors. An important part of the responsibility to making fair and unbiased decisions is the upholding of the principle of editorial independence and integrity. Editors are in a powerful position by making decisions on publications, which makes it very important that this process is as fair and unbiased as possible.
  4. Confidentiality: The editor must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential. Editors should critically assess any potential breaches of data protection and patient confidentiality. This includes requiring properly informed consent for the actual research presented, consent for publication where applicable.
  5. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: The editor of the journal will not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for his/her own research without written consent of the author(s). Editors must not get involved in decisions about papers in which they have a conflict of interest, regardless if the conflict has been declared or not.

 

Duties of Reviewers

  1. Confidentiality: Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors should be kept confidential and treated as privileged information. The manuscripts must not be shown to or discussed with others, except as authorized by the editor.
  2. Acknowledgement of Sources: Manuscript reviewers must ensure that its authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. The reviewers should notify the journal immediately if they come across any irregularities, have concerns about ethical aspects of the work, are aware of substantial similarity between the manuscript and a concurrent submission to another journal or a published article, or suspect that misconduct may have occurred during either the research or the writing and submission of the manuscript. Reviewers should, however, keep their concerns confidential, and not personally investigate further unless the journal asks for further information or advice.
  3. Standards of Objectivity: Review of submitted manuscripts must be done objectively, and the reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. The reviewers should follow journal’s instructions on the specific feedback that is required of them. The reviewers should be constructive in their reviews and provide feedback that will help the authors improve their manuscript. The reviewer should make clear which suggested additional investigations, discoveries and theoretical advancements are essential in order to support claims made in the manuscript under consideration, and which will just strengthen or extend the work
  4. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used to personal advantage. Reviewers may not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the authors. If they suspect the identity of the author(s), the reviewers must notify the journal if this knowledge raises any potential conflict of interest.
  5. Promptness: The reviewers should respond in a reasonable time-frame. The reviewers only agree to review a manuscript if they are fairly confident they can return a review within the proposed or mutually agreed time-frame, informing the journal promptly if they require an extension. In the event that a reviewer feels it is not possible for him/her to review the manuscript within stipulated time, then this information must be communicated to the editor, so that the manuscript could be sent to another reviewer.

This journal does not charge any fees.



 

 

© European Royal Society, 2012-2017