Journal of Errology (JoE)
Please read the below instructions before submitting.
To be accepted, research articles must satisfy the following criteria:
1. Authors must be certain that their submissions are not published elsewhere.
2. All submissions need to be in English and are required to be explained clearly.
3. An inherent principle of publication is that others should be able to replicate and build upon the authors' published claims. The article should present the results of scientific research and the results should be repeatable.
4. Futile hypothesis and failed experiments need to have a sound reasoning behind their results.
5. Micro-submissions, shortfalls and incomplete research papers that have positive results need to be clearly defined and the data behind them attached or linked.
6. The research carried out needs to be original and the data needs to be useful to other researchers. (we agree that it is not in our power to predict which submissions will be useful, hence we will be accepting all kinds of submissions inititally, with the hopes of learning and ignoring those submissions that are not useful)
7. The assurance that the experiments, statistics, and other analysis are performed to a high technical standard, are repeatable and should be described in full detail.
8. Conclusions and discussions (if any) are presented in clearly explained avoiding ambiguity and are supported by the data.
9. The research meets all applicable standards for the ethics of experimentation and research integrity.
10. The article adheres to appropriate reporting guidelines and community standards for data availability.
11. Avoid presenting your results with raw or unprocessed data.
Template For Submissions:
There are four major sections of Journal of Errology that need to be carefully articulated.
Title: Use specific words that define your research or experiment. Please try to keep the title under 30 words.
Abstract: A concise description of the work carried out. If you are submitting stumbles experienced in an already published paper, the abstract should define the particular experiment’s hypothesis in a concise form.
Description: This sections is yours to decide how you want to describe your research. We recommend you to give a complete explanation of the experiment carried out, other related information associated with the research and all other details. We recommend that the description include (can be overlooked in certain cases) introduction, experiments, results, discussions, conclusion, acknowledgements and references.
Avoid adding images, formulas and tables in the description section. Wherever necessary, indicate “Refer Attachment”.
Attachment: Attach images, videos and other datasets related to the submissions.
Once your submission is over and has been accepted by reviewers, you will receive a mail that will allow you to update the details of the published paper.
Everything on Journal of Errology is Open Access and protected under Scientific Creative Commons License. Information can be freely distributed and cited in other papers, if rightly attributed.
Please contact us if you have any suggestions or questions.
Reviewers are the most important part of Journal Of Errorology and help us in our commitment to provide quality scientific information and maintain high standard of articles.
Peer review is one of the most important aspects of all scholarly publications, and is one of the major foundations of scientific process. A reviewer acts as a filter and also helps in improving the quality of research and is the currently one of the most effective methods to judge research papers.
Articles to Be Reviewed: Articles will be sent to reviewers after checking that the article approves all the mentioned criteria. Contacting the author is not strictly permitted, however the reviewer needs to try to maintain confidentiality.
Criteria to be Noted by Reviewers:
Reviewers are expected to follow the below mentioned criteria and evaluate the article.
Originality & Usefulness: One of the most important criteria that needs to be checked for by a reviewer while conducting a review, is the degree of originality and usefulness of an article. Given that we are creating a journal that goes against the current dogma followed by most of the other successful journals and seeks to fill a void left by them, we need to set a standard for articles that add to the already known database of knowledge and indicate an innovative technique or process that probably will be repeated again somewhere, some other time. Reviewers are expected to conduct a quick literature review and indicate other references that the author has not mentioned in his or her article.
Structure & Explanation: A reviewer will need to check the submitted article for the clarity in explanation and layout. Key elements in an article could include Title, Abstract, Introduction, Methodology, Results, Conclusion, References.
Success or Failure: A Reviewer will need to decide whether the indicated methodology is right, the data repeatable and if the conclusion of the author is right. In the case that reviewers are not certain about the submission, they are free to return it without approving or citing that further work might justify re-submission.
Please ask any questions using the contact us page or mail us at firstname.lastname@example.org