Guide for Authors
BEFORE YOU BEGIN
Ethics in publishing
PUBLICATION OF RELATED WORKS
When you submit your manuscript to the Nano Materials Science, please provide the following.
- Article text as a Word, PDF;
- Numbered figures either included within or at the end of the text;
- A cover letter, including a statement of the importance of the work
- A list of preferred reviewers; these should be entered in the manuscript submission system
- Any electronic supplementary information (ESI)
- Any CCDC numbers, as well as CheckCIF files for each crystal structure; see the experimental data section for more information
As well as your revised manuscript, you will be asked to provide a response to the referees, your figures as separate high-resolution files and a table of contents entry. Full details of what you should include will be sent to you by the editor when required.
Licence to publish
Corresponding authors are required to agree to a licence to publish after their article is accepted for publication. Alternatively, a downloadable PDF version is available, which can be completed and returned by email or post to the editorial office.
BEFORE YOU BEGIN
Initial assessment of submissions
We are committed to publishing high quality new work that makes a significant contribution within the scope of the journal. In order to meet this aim, submitted manuscripts undergo initial evaluation by an editor to ensure that they meet essential criteria for publication in the journal.
Only those manuscripts that pass this initial review process will be forwarded to reviewers for further consideration. This process provides a rapid decision to authors of those papers that are unsuccessful and reduces the burden on the reviewers. A manuscript may be returned to the author(s) without external review if, in the opinion of the editor(s), one or more of the following apply:
- the manuscript clearly falls outside the scope of the journal
- the work is of poor scientific quality such that it is clearly not suitable for publication in a scientific journal
- the manuscript is of insufficient general interest for the journal and would be better suited to a more specialised journal
- the novelty of the work falls below that required for the journal
- the manuscript represents undue fragmentation of the research into multiple papers
- the manuscript contains redundant information or significant amounts of material that has already been published elsewhere or is under consideration by another journal
- the quality of the English in the manuscript is so poor as to render the science presented unclear
- the manuscript has already been reviewed and rejected by a different journal, and the author(s) have made little or no attempt to address the advice that the editor and/or referees have provided already.
- the conclusions drawn by the manuscript are well known or have been published previously.
Through Similarity Check, we use the iThenticate software to detect instances of overlapping and similar text in submitted or published manuscripts.
By depositing all of our content in the Similarity Check database we allow other Similarity Check members to screen their submissions against our published articles.
Further details on our plagiarism policies can be found in our Author responsibilities section.
Ethics in publishing
All authors are requested to disclose any actual or potential conflict of interest including any financial, personal or other relationships with other people or organizations within three years of beginning the submitted work that could inappropriately influence, or be perceived to influence, their work. See also https://www.elsevier.com/conflictsofinterest
There is no universally agreed definition of authorship, but authors should, as a minimum, take responsibility for a particular section of the study. The award of authorship should balance intellectual contributions to the conception, design, analysis and writing of the study against the collection of data and other routine work. If there is no task that can reasonably be attributed to a particular individual, then that individual should not be credited with authorship.
All authors must take public responsibility for the content of their paper. The multidisciplinary nature of much research can make this difficult, but this may be resolved by the disclosure of individual contributions.
Authors have a responsibility to give due acknowledgement to all workers contributing to the work. Those who have contributed significantly to the research should be listed as co-authors. On submission of the manuscript, the corresponding author attests to the fact that those named as co-authors have agreed to its submission for publication and accepts (accept) the responsibility for having properly included all (and only) co-authors. If there are more than 10 co-authors on the manuscript then the corresponding author should provide a statement to specify the contribution of each co-author.
The corresponding author signs a 'licence to publish' on behalf of all the authors. Any change in authorship after initial submission must be approved by all authors and justified to the editor.
In the case of authorship disputes, authors are encouraged to reach a mutual agreement. If this is not possible, unresolved disputes should be referred to the responsible research institution(s) for mediation. The Nano Materials Science cannot act as an adjudicator to determine correct authorship.
Please carefully check the spelling and format of all author names, affiliations and funding information. If your paper is accepted for publication, it is important that this information is accurate to ensure your article is correctly indexed, which may affect citations and future funding evaluation.
Authenticity and professionalism
Authenticity and professionalism
Authors have responsibilities as detailed below.
Gather and interpret data in an honest way: Editors, reviewers, readers and publishers have the right to assume that submitted (and published) manuscripts do not contain scientific dishonesty and/or fraud comprising among others fictitious or manipulated data, plagiarised material (either from the previous work of the authors or that of other persons), reference omissions, false priority statements, 'hidden' multiple publication of the same data and incorrect authorship. Authors must not breach any copyright.
When reproducing figures and/or schemes from previous publications, it is the author's responsibility to seek appropriate permission from the relevant publishers.
Present a concise and accurate report of their (your) research and an objective discussion of its significance.
Give due recognition to published work relating to their (your) submitted manuscript by way of correct reference and citation: All sources should be disclosed, and if a significant amount of other people's material is to be used, permission must be sought by the author in accordance with copyright law. An author should not use privately obtained information (for example, information obtained through conversation), or information obtained through the performance of a confidential service (for example, the reviewing of a manuscript), without permission from the person from whom the information originated.
Declare all sources of funding for the work in the manuscript, and also to declare any conflict of interest.
Identify clearly in the manuscript any unusual hazards inherent in the use of chemicals, procedures or equipment in the investigation.
Ensure that their (your) submitted articles contain no personal criticism of other scientists; however, criticism of the work of another scientist may be justified; an article may not contain any defamatory or otherwise actionable material.
PUBLICATION OF RELATED WORKS
Publication of related works
Authors have responsibilities as detailed below.
Avoid undue fragmentation of their work into multiple manuscripts: Editors have the right to reject submitted articles on the grounds of undue fragmentation. In particular, a piece of work should not be split into a number of manuscripts for publication as Communications.
Do not engage in redundant publication: This occurs when two or more papers, without full cross reference, share the same hypothesis, data, discussion points, or conclusions. Previous publication of an abstract or preprint of the proceedings of meetings does not preclude subsequent submission for publication, but full disclosure should be made at the time of submission; please see our processes and policies page for full details in our section, Journal policy on prior publication.
Re-publication of a paper in another language is acceptable, provided that there is full and prominent disclosure of its original source at the time of submission.
Consider publishing related manuscripts in the same journal or a small group of journals: This can be of benefit to readers.
Inform the editor of related manuscripts under consideration for publication by the same author: in any journal, on submission of their current manuscript: Authors should provide copies of these related manuscripts, and details of their present status.
Ensure that a manuscript is submitted for publication in only one journal at a time: It is not acceptable for an author to submit a manuscript (or manuscripts describing essentially the same matter) to more than one journal at a time. A manuscript that is a full paper report of a published Communication may be submitted for publication; however, the author has the responsibility to inform the editor of the previously published Communication.
Articles commonly fall into one of three main categories: Full-length articles, Review articles and Short communications.
Full-length articles are original, unpublished primary research. Extensions of work that has been published previously in short form such as a Communication are usually acceptable.
Short communications must contain original and highly significant work whose high novelty warrants rapid publication.
Review articles may be an authoritative overview of a field, a comprehensive literature reviews, or tutorial-style reference materials. Reviews are usually invited by the editor, but a topic may be proposed by an author via the editorial office.
Format and layout of your article
Keep your writing clear and concise, avoiding repetition or embellishment. All submissions must be in English. We permit standard English and American spelling in our journals, but please use one or the other consistently within the article itself. You are welcome to use common or standard abbreviations; if your abbreviations are non-standard, please include a definition the first time you use them. All articles accepted for publication in the journal are edited and typeset to our house style by professional editors: the manuscript will be formatted for you.
On submission of a manuscript authors should provide all data required to understand and verify the research presented in the article. Nano Materials Science believes that where possible all data associated with the research in a manuscript should be freely available in an accessible and usable format, enabling other researchers to replicate and build on that research.
Bylines should include all those who have made substantial contributions to the work. To facilitate indexing and retrieval and for unique identification of an author, first names, initials, and surnames (e.g., John R. Smith) or first initials, second names, and surnames (e.g., J. Robert Smith) should be used. At least one author must be designated with an asterisk as the author to whom correspondence should be addressed. Corresponding authors are encouraged to supply phone numbers, fax numbers, and e-mail addresses in the manuscript for publication.
Titles should clearly and concisely reflect the emphasis and content of the paper. Titles are of great importance for current awareness and information retrieval and should be carefully constructed for these purposes.
This journal operates a single blind review process. Manuscript will be handled expeditiously and will take full advantage of Web technology in submission and review of manuscripts and approval of page proofs. Manuscripts selected for further review will be sent to a group of peers for evaluation. Authors can greatly expedite the speed of this process by supplying a list of six or more potential reviewers, with their current title and address, including e-mail addresses. Authors may request that certain individuals not be used as referees. Such a request will be honored, unless it is believed that the individual's opinion is vital in the consideration of the manuscript.
- All manuscripts would be firstly reviewed by editorial office in the submission system. Any papers fail to meet the basic standard of the journal would be desk rejected for reasons like out of scope, ethic issues, high similarities, etc.
- Then, editorial office would assign selected papers to an Editor. For submissions from Editor-in-Chief, Associate Editors, Guest Editors and other journal Board members, we ensure that the paper is handled confidentially by a different team member and the manuscript record is blinded within our tracking system to the editor who has a conflict so this person is not able to access either the paper itself or any information about the peer review process. For other submissions, the editor team or Guest Editors will select reviewers who have suitable expertise in the field and must review all disclosures of potential conflicts of interest made by reviewers in order to determine whether there is any potential for bias.
- After at least 2 reviewers give their reviews and comments, the editor team would provide feedbacks based on review comments to the authors including their own review comments.
- When author submits the revised manuscript, the assigned editor would make the final decision.
All authors are encouraged to register for an ORCID ID, a unique researcher identifier. With this standard identifier, you can create a profile of your research activities to distinguish yourself from other researchers with similar names, and make it easier for your colleagues to find your publications.
All manuscripts must contain an abstract, not exceeding 2,000 characters, which should state briefly the purpose of the research, the principal results, and major conclusions.
Authors are required to include four to six keywords placed after the abstract.
ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION (ESI)
Electronic supplementary information (ESI)
You can include ESI with your article to enhance and increase the impact of your work, for example by including 3D molecular models and movies. Authors can also improve the readability of their articles by placing appropriate material in the ESI, such as repetitive experimental details or bulky data. All information published as ESI is fully archived and permanently linked to the article using CrossMark.
When preparing your ESI data files, you should keep in mind the following points:
- Supplementary data is peer-reviewed and should therefore be included with the original submission.
- ESI files are published 'as is'; editorial staff will not edit the data for style or content.
- Data are useful only if readers can access it; use common, widely known file formats.
- Large files may prove difficult for users to download and access.
- References cited in the ESI should be included in a separate references list within the ESI document.
In the Web edition of the Journal, references will be linked to various electronic sources; therefore, the accuracy of the references is critical. Authors are responsible for the accuracy of the references. References to the literature should be numbered in one consecutive series by order of appearance in the text, with the text citations presented as unparenthesized superscript Arabic numbers. For work published online (ASAP) and work submitted for publication (e.g., submitted; in press), the DOI should be furnished in addition to the standard bibliographic information. DOI is an accepted form of citation before and after the article appears in an issue. for example:
Brown, A.; Ngai, T. Y.; Barnes, M. A.; Key, J. A.; Cairo, C. W. J. Phys. Chem. A 2011, DOI: 10.1021/jp2079296.
Where a preprint has subsequently become available as a peer-reviewed publication, the formal publication should be used as the reference. If there are preprints that are central to your work or that cover crucial developments in the topic, but are not yet formally published, these may be referenced. Preprints should be clearly marked as such, for example by including the word preprint, or the name of the preprint server, as part of the reference. The preprint DOI should also be provided.
Patents and intellectual property
Patents and intellectual property Due to our journals' fast times to publication,(Due to our fast publication times,) authors are advised to resolve any pending intellectual property or patent applications before they submit their article, so they do not contravene the terms of any outstanding applications. Accepted manuscripts are published online less than 24 hours after acceptance; while the version of record is published online within a few days of receiving proof corrections.
EDITOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO AUTHORS
Editor's responsibility to authors
- Submitted manuscripts will be handled in a confidential manner, with no details being disclosed to anyone - with the exception of the reviewers - without the permission of the author, until a decision has been taken as to whether the manuscript is to be published.
- Confidentiality of the names and other details of reviewers is ensured; adjudication and appeal reviewers may be informed of the names of prior reviewers, if appropriate. Reviewers can choose to voluntarily sign their comments to authors if they wish, see our policy on reviewer anonymity for more information.
- We are fully compliant with data protection regulations, as appropriate.
- To acknowledge receipt of submitted manuscripts within two working days of submission and to ensure the efficient, fair and timely assessment of submitted manuscripts.
- To make the final decision concerning acceptance or rejection of a manuscript.
- To decide to accept or reject a manuscript for publication with reference only to the manuscript's importance, originality and clarity, and its relevance to the journal.
- To respect the intellectual independence of authors.
- To make known any conflicts of interest that might arise. Specifically, in cases where an editor is an author of a submitted manuscript, the manuscript must be passed to another editor for independent peer review.
- Not to use work reported in unpublished submitted articles for their own research.
- To consider the use of an author's suggested reviewers for their submitted article. However, the editor maintains the right to use reviewers of their own choice.
- Not to use reviewers which an author has requested are not to be consulted, unless the editor reasonably considers there to be a significant over-riding interest in so doing.
- To respond to any suggestions of scientific misconduct or to convincing evidence that the main substance or conclusions of a published manuscript is erroneous, usually through consultation with the author. This may require the publication of a formal 'retraction' or correction. We follow the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) flowcharts as the basis for our best practice guidelines when investigating allegations of misconduct.
- To deal fairly with an author's appeal against the rejection of a submitted manuscript.
- Only in the most extreme and unusual cases, and with the specific agreement of the editorial board and the chair of the Publishing Board, may sanctions of limited duration be applied to an author.
The Nano Materials Science will use the information you supply for the provision and administration of its activities, products and services. We do not share your personal data to any individual or organisation unless they are working directly with us as a contractor, as part of maintaining our activities, products, or services. Such contractors are subject to a non-disclosure agreement.
Correction and retraction policy
It is our policy not to amend, alter or remove the published scientific record, in line with the International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers' (STM) guidelines: Articles that have been published should remain extant, exact and unaltered to the maximum extent possible (STM Guidelines on Preservation of the Objective Record of Science) We will respond to any suggestions of scientific misconduct or to convincing evidence that the main substance or conclusions of a published manuscript is erroneous, usually through consultation with the author. This may require the publication of a formal 'retraction' or correction. We follow the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) flowcharts as the basis for our best practice guidelines when investigating allegations of misconduct. An expression of concern may be published by the editor whilst an investigation into alleged misconduct or publication of erroneous data is ongoing. Authors who wish to enquire about publication of a correction for their article, or who have serious concern that they believe may warrant retraction, should contact the journal editorial office.
We follow the Committee on Publishing Ethics (COPE) guidelines for correcting and retracting articles. The expression of concern is free to view and is linked to the article of record to which it relates.
Correction We will consider issuing a correction if:
- the scientific record is seriously affected, for example with regard to the scientific accuracy of published information
- a small portion of an otherwise reliable publication proves to be misleading (especially because of honest error)
- the author/contributor list is incorrect (i.e. a deserving author has been omitted or somebody who does not meet authorship criteria has been included).
Retraction We will consider issuing a retraction notice if:
- we have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (for example, data fabrication) or honest error (such as a miscalculation or experimental error)
- the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper cross-referencing, permission or justification (that is, cases of redundant publication)
- the publication constitutes plagiarism
- the publication reports unethical research.