Submission Preparation ChecklistAs part of the submission process, authors are required to check off their submission's compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.
- The submission has not been previously published, nor is it before another journal for consideration (or an explanation has been provided in Comments to the Editor).
- Where available, URLs for the references have been provided.
- The text adheres to the stylistic and bibliographic requirements outlined in the Author Guidelines.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR AUTHORS
Research reviews should not be less than 7000 words or more than 10,000 words (plus up to 15 figures and up to 50 references).
Whenever possible articles should adjust to the standard structure comprising:
(a) Graphical abstract,
(c) Introduction describing the focus of the review,
(d) Article main body including assessment and discussion of available information (may be further subdivided),
Authors must submit their articles in a Microsoft Word archive. Figures must be embedded in the article and also submitted in a separate .zip or .rar file.
References must be numbered in the text (  ) and identified with the same numbers in the References section. Up to 50 references are allowed. The following are examples to take into account in each case.
- Single author
Chung, R. General Chemistry: Fundamental Knowledge, 2nd ed.; McGuffin-Hill: Kansas City, 2003.
- More than one author
Chung, R.; Williamson, M. General Chemistry: Fundamental Knowledge, 2nd ed.; McGuffin-Hill: Kansas City, 2003.
- Edited Book
Kurti, F. Photodissociation and Reactive Scattering. In The Rise of Chemical Physics; White, A. D., Ed.; Wilson: New Jersey, 2007; Vol. 128; p. 257.
- Book in Series
Goth, V. Polymer Chemistry. In The Foundational Course in Organic Chemistry; ACDC Symposium Series 1151; American Chemical Fraternity: Seattle, 2014; pp 123-149.
- Article from a reference book
Powder and Metallurgy. Dictionary of Chemical Technology, 3rd ed.; Wilson: New Jersey, 1971; Vol. 12, pp 68-82.
- Article in a scientific journal
Evans, A.; Stitch, M.; Smithers, E. T.; Nope, J. J. Complex Aldol Reactions to the Total Synthesis of Phorboxazole B. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2012, 122, 10033-10046.
- Article in a popular/non-scientific magazine
Tatum, C. J. Super Organics. Wireless, June 2001, pp 76-93.
- Article from an online journal
Turkey-Lopez, E. Inexact Solutions of the Quantum Double Square-Well Potential. Chem. Ed. [Online] 2007, 11, pp. 838-847. http://chemeducator.org/bibs/0011006/11060380lb.htm (accessed Aug 5, 2019).
The journal considers that the primary objective of all submissions must be a contribution of relevant and appropriate content, and that all review processes must be structured based on that general criterion. Therefore, there is an emphasis on the concern to maintain the highest quality and ethics standards in the reception, evaluation and publication of articles. These standards include the three participants of the process: author, reviewer and editor.
1. Author’s responsibilities
- Submitted manuscripts should maintain rigorous scientific criteria for data validation and conclusions.
- All data (Figures, Tables, etc.) reproduced from previous published articles must give the appropriate recognition to the source. Plagiarism is cause enough to reject the submission.
- Authorship must include all individuals who have contributed in a substantial way to the composition, prior investigation, and execution of the paper. Minor contributions must be acknowledged, but these contributors should not be listed as authors. The main author or authors of the article will make sure that all participants of the paper have approved the final version of the document submitted.
- All authors must reveal in their final manuscript any financial or other type of conflict of interests that might interfere with the results and interpretations in their research. All funding received to carry out the project must be acknowledged.
- After the article is published, in the event an author notices a crucial fault or inaccuracy, he or she should immediately report that fault or inaccuracy, so that an Erratum can be issued as soon as possible.
2. Reviewer’s responsibilities
Reviewing is a time-consuming process that is carried out ad honorem by bona fide scientists conversant with the subject of the reviewed paper. The quality and the ethical standards of the journal depend critically on the quality of the reviewing process, and the following guidelines are established:
- All documents sent to the journal for review will be considered confidential documents and will not be discussed with external third parties.
- When invited, a potential reviewer should decline if: (a) the subject of the article is not within his/her area of expertise; (b) there is any kind of conflict of interest; (c) if the review cannot be finished within the period established by the journal.
- Any criticism or objections to the paper should be done in a neutral tone and based on reasonable grounds, not limited to simple opinions or purely subjective expressions.
3. Editor’s responsibilities
- The editors are responsible for selecting the papers that will be published in the journal. The Editorial Management must comply with the ethical standards of the journal, as well as with all legal guidelines, including the prohibition of plagiarism and any other form of copyright infringement.
- The editors will evaluate and make decisions on the articles sent to the journal regardless of the gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, nationality or political ideology of the authors.
- Revealing information identifying reviewers is forbidden.
- The final version of all materials can be published only with the prior approval of their author.
- The editors will refrain from publishing manuscripts that imply a conflict of interests because of any possible connection with other institutions, companies and authors.
- Before deciding to send an article to a peer review, the editors are committed to thoroughly read all texts received and determine their appropriateness to the thematic universe of the journal.
- If a misbehavior or unethical action by an author or reviewer is identified, the editors must request the informer of such conduct or action to provide the evidence that may justify a possible investigation. All accusations will be handled seriously until reliable results are obtained regarding its truthfulness or falseness. If an investigation takes place, the editors are responsible for choosing the appropriate way in which it will be carried out. They can also request the advice and assistance from the Editorial Board, as well as from reviewers and authors.
- In the event a serious non-malicious mistake or a dishonest conduct by an author or a reviewer is proved, the editors shall act according to the nature and seriousness of the case. The actions the editors may take include, but are not limited to: notifying the author or reviewer of the existence of a serious mistake or misapplication of the ethical standards of the journal; writing a strong statement that reports and warns about a bad practice or unethical behavior; publishing that statement; unilaterally withdrawing the reported paper from the review or publication process; revoking the paper if it has already been published; communicating the journal’s decision and the reasons behind it to the general public; and banning paper submissions by the people involved for a certain period of time.
The names and email addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.