For editors
Editor responsibilities
What the journal asks of the editors who handle its manuscripts, and the independence it guarantees them in return.
- Review model
- Single-blind by default; double-blind review is available on request.
- Reviewers
- Normally at least two, on manuscripts sent for external review
- Decision authority
- The handling editor
- Editorial office
- [email protected]
Responsibilities
These are the obligations an editor takes on with a manuscript, in the order they arise.
Assess scope before review
All submissions undergo initial editorial screening. Manuscripts that meet the journal's scope and minimum requirements proceed to independent peer review.
Scope is judged against Aims and Scope, not against personal preference or the expectation of citation.
Commission review that can answer the question
Manuscripts that proceed to external peer review are normally evaluated by at least two independent subject-matter experts.
Choose reviewers for their command of the methods actually used in the manuscript, and check for conflicts before inviting them.
Handle the review model correctly
Single-blind by default; double-blind review is available on request.
When double-blind review is requested, editors must ensure that author-identifying information is not shared with reviewers.
Decide, and be able to say why
Editorial decisions are based on scope, scientific quality, methodological rigor, ethical compliance, reporting quality, and relevance to the journal.
A decision letter should let the author see which of those grounds carried weight, and which reviewer points the editor considered decisive.
Declare conflicts and step aside
Editors recuse themselves from decisions on their own submissions; those manuscripts are handled independently.
An editor with a competing interest in a manuscript — collaborative, institutional, financial or personal — passes it to another editor and takes no part in the decision.
Keep the manuscript confidential
A submitted manuscript is confidential. It is not shared, cited or used outside the review process, and material in it is not used before publication.
Use of AI in editorial assessment
Reviewers must obtain journal permission before using AI to assist with a review. Any permitted use must be disclosed, and confidential manuscript content must not be uploaded where confidentiality cannot be assured.
The same condition applies to editorial assessment: confidential manuscript content is not placed in a service that cannot assure confidentiality.
Act on integrity concerns
Where an ethics, authorship, data or overlap concern arises, the editor pauses the decision, establishes the facts with the authors and their institution where necessary, and records what was found. Corrections and retractions are published as citable notices.
The journal's side of the bargain
Editorial judgment is protected, and the journal states that on its public pages.
Independence
Editorial decisions remain independent of fees, services, memberships, or roles.
No commercial arrangement, membership or author service is visible to an editor assessing a manuscript, and none of them is grounds for a decision.
Support
The editorial office handles correspondence, screening logistics and production, so the editor's work is the scientific assessment.
Guidance for reviewers, which editors may point to when inviting them, is on the For Reviewers page.
Journal of Nervous System and Physiological Phenomena
Published by Open Access Pub
Questions about whether a manuscript fits the journal may be sent to [email protected] before submission. Author requirements are set out in the Instructions for Authors, and the subject boundary in Aims and Scope.