Authors Instructions
1. General
1.1. Article Type
Paragraphs require authors to carefully select the appropriate article type
for their manuscript on the article type section page, which can be seen from the submission platform menu.
Following
is the description Article type:
Addendum, Article, Book Review, Brief Report, Case Report, Comment, Commentary,
Communication, Concept Paper, Conference Report, Creative, Data Descriptor, Discussion, Editorial, Essay, Hypothesis,
Interesting Image, Letter, Meeting Report, New Book Received, Opinion, Project Report, Reply, Review, Short Note,
Technical Note
1.2. Templates
If working with Word please use our Paragraphs Word templates . If you wish to
submit your article in LaTeX, please ensure all relevant manuscript files are uploaded: .tex file, PDF, and .bib file
(if the bibliography is not already included in the .tex file). For the Cover letter please use this template and
convert it to PDF before you submit in Paragraphs Submission Platform.
1.3. Language Editing
Paragraphs
require manuscripts submitted to meet international English language standards to be considered for publication. For
authors who would like their manuscript to receive language editing or proofreading to improve the clarity of the
manuscript and help highlight their research, Paragraphs recommends the language-editing services provided by the
external partners through Paragraphs support service. However, Language Editing does not guarantee the accepted
manuscript.
1.4 CrossMark Policy
CrossMark is a multi-publisher initiative to provide a standard way for
readers to locate the current version of a piece of content. By applying the CrossMark logo Paragraphs is committed to
maintaining the content it publishes and to alerting readers to changes if and when they occur. Clicking on the
CrossMark logo will tell you the current status of a document and may also give you additional publication record
information about the document.
2. Figure and Table
2.1. CC-BY Licence
All figures, tables, and
images will be published under a Creative Commons CC-BY license, and permission must be obtained for use of
copyrighted material from other sources (including re-published/adapted/modified/partial figures and images from the
internet). It is the responsibility of the authors to acquire the licenses, follow any citation instructions requested
by third-party rights holders, and cover any supplementary charges.
2.2. Figure Requirements
Please note
that figures not in accordance with the guidelines will cause substantial delays during the production
process.
*Paragraphs require figures to be submitted individually, in the same order as they are referred to in
the manuscript; the figures will then be automatically embedded at the end of the submitted manuscript. Kindly ensure
that each figure is mentioned in the text and in numerical order.
*For figures with more than one panel, panels
should be clearly indicated using
labels (A), (B), (C), (D), etc. However, do not embed the part labels over any
part
of the image, these labels will be replaced during typesetting. For graphs, there must be a self-explanatory
label (including units) along each axis.
*For LaTeX files, figures should be included in the provided PDF. In
case of acceptance, our Production Office might require high-resolution files of the figures included in the
manuscript in EPS, JPEG or TIF/TIFF format.
*All images must have a resolution of 300 dpi at the final size.
Check the resolution of your figure by enlarging it to 150%. If the image appears blurry, jagged, or has a
stair-stepped effect, the resolution is too low. Please note that saving a figure directly as an image file (JPEG,
TIF) can greatly affect the resolution of your image. To avoid this, one option is to export the file as PDF, then
convert it into TIFF or EPS using graphics software.
*Chemical structures should be prepared using ChemDraw or
a similar program.
If working with another program, please follow this instruction (Drawing settings:
chain
angle, 120° bond spacing, 18% width; fixed length, 14.4 pt; bold width, 2.0 pt; line width, 0.6 pt; margin width, 1.6
pt; hash spacing, 2.5 pt. Scale 100% Atom Label settings: font, Arial; size, 8 pt).
*In order to be able to
upload more than one figure at a time, save the figures
(labeled in order of appearance in the manuscript) in a zip
file and upload them as ‘Supplementary Material Presentation.’
3. Supplementary Material
Data that are not
of primary importance to the text, or which cannot be included in the article because they are too large or the
current format does not permit it
(such as videos, raw data traces, powerpoint presentations, etc.), can be
uploaded as Supplementary Material during the submission procedure and will be displayed along with the published
article. All supplementary files are deposited to Figshare for permanent storage and receive a DOI.
Supplementary
Material is not typeset, so please ensure that all information is clearly presented without tracked
changes/highlighted text/line numbers, and the appropriate caption is included in the file. To avoid discrepancies
between the published article and the supplementary material, please do not add the title, author list, affiliations
or correspondence in the supplementary files.
The Supplementary Material can be uploaded as Data Sheet
(Word,
Excel, CSV, CDX, FASTA, PDF or Zip files),
Presentation (PowerPoint, PDF or Zip files),
Image (CDX, EPS, JPEG,
PDF, PNG or TIF/TIFF),
Table (Word, Excel, CSV or PDF), Audio (MP3, WAV or WMA) or
Video (AVI, DIVX, FLV, MOV,
MP4, MPEG, MPG or WMV).
Technical requirements for Supplementary Images: 300 DPIs RGB color mode
4.
References
*All citations in the text, figures or tables must be in the reference list and vice-versa.
*The
names of the first six authors followed by et al. and the DOI (when available) should be provided.
*The
reference list should only include articles that are published or accepted.
*Unpublished data, submitted
manuscripts or personal communications should be cited within the text only, for the article types that allow such
inclusions.
*For accepted but unpublished works use "in press" instead of page numbers.
*Data sets that
have been deposited to an online repository should be included in the reference list. Include the version and unique
identifier when available.
*Personal communications should be documented by a letter of permission.
*Website
URLs should be included as footnotes.
*Any inclusion of verbatim text must be contained in quotation marks
and
clearly reference the original source.
Reference List
ARTICLE IN A PRINT JOURNAL
Sondheimer, N.,
and Lindquist, S. (2000). Rnq1: an epigenetic modifier of protein function in yeast. Mol. Cell. 5, 163-172.
ARTICLE
IN AN ONLINE JOURNAL
Tahimic, C.G.T., Wang, Y., Bikle, D.D. (2013). Anabolic effects of IGF-1 signaling on the
skeleton. Front. Endocrinol. 4:6. doi: 10.3389/fendo.2013.00006
ARTICLE OR CHAPTER IN A BOOK
Sorenson, P.
W., and Caprio, J. C. (1998). "Chemoreception," in The Physiology of Fishes, ed. D. H. Evans (Boca Raton, FL: CRC
Press), 375-405.
BOOK
Cowan, W. M., Jessell, T. M., and Zipursky, S. L. (1997). Molecular and Cellular
Approaches to Neural Development. New York: Oxford University Press.
ABSTRACT
Hendricks, J., Applebaum, R.,
and Kunkel, S. (2010). A world apart? Bridging the gap between theory and applied social gerontology. Gerontologist
50, 284-293. Abstract retrieved from Abstracts in Social Gerontology database. (Accession No. 50360869)
WEBSITE
World
Health Organization. (2018). E. coli. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/e-coli [Accessed March 15,
2018].
PATENT
Marshall, S. P. (2000). Method and apparatus for eye tracking and monitoring pupil dilation to
evaluate cognitive activity. U.S. Patent No 6,090,051. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark
Office.
DATA
Perdiguero P, Venturas M, Cervera MT, Gil L, Collada C. Data from: Massive sequencing of Ulms
minor's transcriptome provides new molecular
tools for a genus under the constant threat of Dutch elm disease.
Dryad
Digital Repository. (2015) http://dx.doi.org/10.5061/dryad.ps837
THESES AND DISSERTATIONS Smith, J. (2008)
Post-structuralist discourse relative to phenomological pursuits in the deconstructivist arena. [dissertation/master’s
thesis]. [Chicago (IL)]: University of Chicago
PREPRINT
Smith, J. (2008). Title of the document. Preprint
repository name [Preprint]. Available at: https://persistent-url (Accessed March 15, 2018).
Reviewer Instructions
Reviewers are expected to follow the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. If you are in any doubt about the expectations for reviewers, advice should be sought from the Editor.
1. Conflict of Interest
When asked to review a manuscript, you should disclose to the Editor any conflicts of interest that could bias your opinion of the manuscript. If you believe that you cannot judge a manuscript impartially because of contact with the authors or a possible conflict of interest, please decline the invitation to review and provide an explanation to the Editor.
Importantly, the perception of a conflict of interest is as significant as an actual conflict of interest.
Financial or business relationships are the most easily identifiable conflicts of interest and the most likely to undermine the credibility of the journal and authors. Conflicts can also occur for other reasons, such as personal relationships or rivalries, academic competition, or intellectual or ideological beliefs.
Possible conflicts of interest may occur when reviewers:
* have a history of serious (unresolved) disagreement with the authors
* have been recent (i.e. in the past 3 years) collaborators or jointly published papers
* are currently employed at the same institution or have a mentor/mentee relationship
* were part of an internal review panel for the paper before submission.
If you are unsure whether the potential for bias exists, please ask the Editor.
2. Privacy of unpublished results
An unpublished manuscript is a privileged document. Please protect it from any form of exploitation. Do not cite a manuscript or refer to the work it describes before it has been published and do not use the information that it contains for the advancement of your own research or in discussion with colleagues.
Do not discuss the manuscript with its authors unless permission has been granted by the Editor. Although it may seem natural and reasonable to discuss points of difficulty or disagreement directly with the author, especially if you are generally in favour of publication and do not mind revealing your identity, this practice is prohibited because the other reviewer(s) and the Editor may have different opinions, and the author may be misled by having ´cleared things up´ with the reviewer who contacted him/her directly.
3.Timeframe
Reviews should be completed within 25–30 days. If you know that you cannot finish the review within that time, please contact the Editorial Office immediately. In addition, if you believe that you cannot judge a given article impartially through contact with the authors or a possible conflict of interest, please return it immediately with an explanation.
4. The review
The review should give your overall impression of the manuscript, and list the major shortcomings. Please consider the following aspects in particular:
* The novelty of the work, and whether there is sufficient originality and substance to be worthy of publication
* The articulation of the rationale or hypothesis
* The appropriateness of the experimental design and analyses
* Authors have documented human or animal ethics approval if relevant and considered ethical and welfare issues as appropriate
* The quality of the technical analysis, and the correct use of units
* The interpretation of results
* Awareness (cogent discussion) of related international research
It would be helpful to the Editor to comment on unnecessary length and to point out figures and tables that have secondary importance and could be presented as Supplementary Material.
5. Recommendations
Your recommendation will assist the Editor in deciding whether to publish the article. If recommending revision, be specific in stating the changes you feel need to be made, allowing the author to reply to each point. Please ensure your feedback is constructive and polite.
* Accept
If you're recommending acceptance, give details outlining why.
There may still be a few basic typos to correct or simple suggestions to consider,
but no substantial revision. You will not be asked to review the manuscript again.
* Minor revisions
These are more substantial than basic typos, but still relatively straightforward, and may include:
Corrections to references (and is all the relevant work cited?);
Corrections to factual, numerical or unit errors;
Corrections to ambiguous text;
Corrections to tables and figures – are these appropriate, sufficient, and correctly labelled
Typically, you will not be asked to review the manuscript again after minor revision.
*Major revisions
These are at a more demanding level. While you believe the research may warrant publication, you are requesting new analysis, discussion and/or significant revision. If major revisions are required, please indicate clearly what they are. You may be asked to review the manuscript again after revision.
*Reject and resubmit
Some journals offer this option where substantial revision is necessary. Be clear in your comments to the author (or editor) which points are absolutely critical if the paper is given an opportunity for revision.
* Reject
Give constructive but polite feedback where manuscripts have serious flaws.
This encourages developing researchers to improve their work. Reasons for rejection may include:
Major flaws – state what they are and the severity of their impact on the paper;
Similarity to work already published without the authors acknowledging this;
Major presentational problems - figures, tables, language and manuscript structure are not clear enough for you to accurately assess the work; Ethical issues (if you are unsure it may be better to disclose these in the confidential comments section). You will not be asked to review the manuscript again.
6. Grammatical editing
Reviewers are not requested to correct deficiencies of style or mistakes in grammar, but any help you can give in clarifying meaning will be appreciated (track changes can expedite the editing process; a MS Word file, in addition to the PDF, is available in submission platform by accessing the Manuscript Files tab). The copy-editing staff employed will edit each accepted manuscript. It is their function to polish and correct the grammar, syntax, and spelling and to enforce the editorial style of the journal. However, be on the lookout for errors that the copyeditors might miss. Examples are misspellings of chemical names, use of outmoded terminology, misspelled or misidentified scientific names of organisms, inappropriate scientific jargon, and incorrect genetic nomenclature.
7. Reviewer Credit
Paragrpahs Publishing recognises and values the significant investment of time
and expertise by peer reviewers to ensure that the research we publish is of the highest standard. We provide our reviewers with credit in a number of ways:
*Inclusion names in a published article.
*A certificate to confirm the review contribution (upon request)
*APC discount code to submission article in the journal
*Partnering with Publons to provide official recognition of your peer review contributions.