The journal International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE) publishes original papers that have not been published previously. The journal publish: Original Research, Review Articles, Studies and articles, Book reviews, Case Studies, Monographic studies. International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE) is an Open Access journal.
Contributions to journal may be submitted in English language.
The Journal is issued twice a year.
The papers should cover topics in one of the following areas:
- Cognitive Research in Science
- Cognitive Research in Engineering
- Cognitive Research in Education
- Cognitive Pedagogics
- Cognitive Androgogics
- Cognitive Psychology
- Cognitive Linguistics
- Cognitive Culture Studies
- Cognitive Geography
- Cognitive Neurophysiology
- Cognitive Aspects of Biology, Physiology, Neurophysiology
- Cognitive Aspects of Sociology, Political Science
- Cognitive Problems of Economics and Management
- Cognitive Aspects: Sport Culture
- Cognitive Aspects: Methodology of Knowledge
- Text Processing and Cognitive Technologies
- Educational technology
The editor is responsible for deciding which articles submitted to International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE) will be published. The editor is guided by the policies of the journal's Editorial Board and constrained by legal requirements in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
Editors must hold no conflict of interest with regard to the articles they consider for publication. If an Editor feels that there is likely to be a perception of a conflict of interest in relation to their handling of a submission, the selection of reviewers and all decisions on the paper shall be made by the Editorial Board. Editors have a responsibility to protect the anonymity of reviewers and/or authors as per the highest academic standards.
Editors shall evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content free from any racial, gender, sexual, religious, ethnic, or political bias.
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author.
Authors warrant that their manuscript is their original work that it has not been published before and is not under consideration for publication elsewhere. The Authors also warrant that the manuscript is not and will not be published elsewhere (after the publication in International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE)) in any language without the consent of the copyright holder.
Authors warrant that the rights of third parties will not be violated, and that the publisher will not be held legally responsible should there be any claims for compensation.
Authors are exclusively responsible for the contents of their submissions, the validity of the experimental results and must make sure that they have permission from all involved parties to make the data public.
Authors wishing to include figures or text passages that have already been published elsewhere are required to obtain permission from the copyright holder(s) and to include evidence that such permission has been granted when submitting their papers. Any material received without such evidence will be assumed to originate from the authors.
Authors must make sure that all only contributors who have significantly contributed to the submission are listed as authors and, conversely, that all contributors who have significantly contributed to the submission are listed as authors.
It is the responsibility of each author to ensure that papers submitted to International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE) are written with ethical standards in mind and that they not contain plagiarism. Authors affirm that the article contains no unfounded or unlawful statements and does not violate the rights of others.
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal Editor or publisher and cooperate with the Editor to retract or correct the paper.
The submitted papers are subject to a peer review process. The purpose of peer review is to assists the Еditor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author it may also assist the author in improving the paper.
A manuscript goes through the peer review process - Double-blind peer-review. Double-blind peer review mean that reviewers are unaware of the identity of the authors, and authors are also unaware of the identity of reviewers. There have to be at least two reviewers. The typical period of time allowed for reviews: 6 weeks. Note: Can be modified during the editorial process.
The choice of reviewers is at the editors' discretion. The reviewers must be knowledgeable about the subject area of the manuscript; they must not be from the authors' own institution and they should not have recent joint publications with any of the authors.
Reviewers must not have conflict of interest with respect to the research, the authors and/or the funding sources for the research. If such conflicts exist, the reviewers must report them to the Editor without delay.
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor without delay.
Reviews must be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents.
Authors submit manuscripts to Editorial office via the online system. The acknowledgment letter should be sent to the author to confirm the receipt of the manuscript. The Chief Editor first reviews manuscripts. Chief Editor is assisted by Section Editors (could also be Co- or Associated Editors). The Editor assigns a Section Editor to see the manuscript through the complete review process and return it with a recommendation or decision. The manuscript is checked to see if it meets the scope of the Journal and its formal requirements. If it is incorrect or unsuitable, the author should be informed and the manuscript filed (or returned if requested) – direct rejection. Manuscripts that are not suitable for publication in the Journal are rejected. A Rejection letter is sent to the author stating the reason for rejection. If the manuscript conforms to the aims and scope of the Journal and formally abides by the Instructions to Authors it is sent out for review. Depending on the type of paper, it could be accepted immediately for publication (invited Editorial, Book review etc) by the Chief Editor.
Check that the manuscript has been written and styled in accordance with the Journal style; that it carries an abstract (if applicable), keywords, correct reference system etc. and check that the correct blinding system has been used. If anything is missing ask the author to complete it before the manuscript is sent out for review.
The manuscript is sent out for review. The reviewer reads and evaluates the manuscript and eventually sends a review report to the Chief Editor. The time for review can be set to 2-6 weeks depending on the discipline (more time is usually given to papers in the humanities and social sciences). Make sure to provide the reviewer with clear instructions for the work, e.g. outlined in the form of a Review report or a number of questions to be considered.
Based on the reviewers’ comments the Chief Editor makes a decision to:
- Accept the manuscript without further revision
- Accept after revision
- Ask authors to resubmit
An acceptance letter is sent to the author and the final manuscript is forwarded to production. Sometimes, the authors are requested to revise in accordance with reviewers’ comments and submit the updated version or their manuscript to the Chief Editor. The time for review can be set to 2-8 weeks depending on the discipline and type of additional data, information or argument required. The authors are requested to make substantial revisions to their manuscripts and resubmit for a new evaluation. A rejection letter is sent to the author and the manuscript is archived. Reviewers might be informed about the decision.
After review, a manuscript goes to the Copy Editor who will correct the manuscript concerning the correct referencing system, confirmation with the journal style and layout. When Copy Editor finishes his/her work they send manuscripts to the Layout editor.
Layout Editor is responsible for structuring the original manuscript, including figures and tables, into an article, activating necessary links and preparing the manuscript in the various formats, in our case PDF and HTML format. When Layout Editor finishes his/her job they send manuscripts to Proof Editor.
Proof Editor confirms that the manuscript has gone through all the stages and can be published.
All of the reviewers of a paper act independently and they are not aware of each other’s identities. If the decisions of the two reviewers are not the same (accept/reject), the Editor may assign additional reviewers.
The Editorial team shall ensure reasonable quality control for the reviews. With respect to reviewers whose reviews are convincingly questioned by authors, special attention will be paid to ensure that the reviews are objective and high in academic standard. When there is any doubt with regard to the objectivity of the reviews or quality of the review, additional reviewers will be assigned.
Basic principles for reviewers
Peer reviewers should:
• only agree to review manuscripts for which they have the subject expertise required to carry out a proper assessment and which they can assess in a timely manner
• respect the confidentiality of peer review and not reveal any details of a manuscript or its review, during or after the peer-review process, beyond those that are released by the journal
• not use information obtained during the peer-review process for their own or any other person’s or organization’s advantage, or to disadvantage or discredit others
• declare all potential conflicting interests, seeking advice from the journal if they are unsure whether something constitutes a relevant interest
• not allow their reviews to be influenced by the origins of a manuscript, by the nationality, religious or political beliefs, gender or other characteristics of the authors, or by commercial considerations
• be objective and constructive in their reviews, refraining from being hostile or inflammatory and from making libellous or derogatory personal comments
• acknowledge that peer review is largely a reciprocal endeavour and undertake to carry out their fair share of reviewing and in a timely manner
• provide journals with personal and professional information that is accurate and a true representation of their expertise
• recognize that impersonation of another individual during the review process is considered serious misconduct
Irene Hames on behalf of COPE CouncilMarch 2013, v.1
Guidelines for Reviewers
Before start with reviewing if there is any conflict of interest, please notify the Editor in Chief.
Each received article is forwarded to two independent reviewers – double blind review (reviewers do not know who is the author of the work, the author does not know who are the reviewers of his work). We insist on anonymity because we believe that this procedure will contribute to more independent, more critical and better examination papers.
Each reviewer has a period of 2-6 weeks to review the article. If you are unable to comply with deadlines, please inform without delay notify the Editor in Chief. The reviewer does not have the rights to the content of the paper, the other, or that data from work that benefits are reviewed for any purpose.
Reviewers have an obligation to care about ethical issues. If the paper is plagiarized or if the same title published in another journal or proceedings, please inform without delay notify the Editor in Chief.
At the beginning of the reviewer form, the reviewer states his name, title, and full name of the institution where he or she works, place and date of peer review. These data are confidential, remain with editorial boards and is not sent to the author of the work, in addition to the required corrections, suggestions and complaints if any.
Investigate the journal’s content
First thing you need is to watch the originality, relevance, presentation and the importance of the manuscript. Visit the journal homepage and look at the Instructions for Authors to see if the paper meets the submission criteria of the journal. This will help you in deciding whether the paper being reviewed is suitable or not.
In the review form that you get, write your opinion - report on the quantitative work.
How to writing your report:
Complete the all review questions in the report form. Write your report on the quantities work. Your report does not have to agree with the author. If you think make suggestions as to how the author can improve clarity, succinctness, and the overall quality of presentation.
Try to see first does the article fit the scope of the journal, does the article is original, does the research help to expand of further research in this subject area, would the paper be of interest to the readership of the journal. If on some of these question you find answer No, reconsider to recommend that author submit the paper in some related journal. Also, look does the article is in Standard English language, does the original research has IMRAD methodology, is there an abstract or brief summary of the work undertaken as well as a concluding section.
Make a recommendation
After you finished reading the paper and have assessed its quality, you need to make a recommendation to the editor regarding publication. You have to make next decision:
Accept the manuscript without further revision – if the manuscript is suitable for publication in its current form.
Accept after revision – if the manuscript will be ready for publication after light revisions.
Ask authors to resubmit – the article needs a lot of changes and need to submit the manuscript again.
Reject – if the paper is not manuscript for publication with this journal or if the revisions that would need to be undertaken.
When authors make revisions to their article in response to reviewer comments, they are asked to submit a list of changes and any comments for transmission to the reviewers.
If possible, the revised version is usually returned to the original reviewer who is then asked to affirm whether the revisions have been carried out satisfactorily.
What if you cannot make review?
If you cannot make review you should immediately notify the editorial office that you cannot do this job. If you are unable to complete your report on a paper in the agreed time-frame inform the editorial office as soon as possible so that the refereeing procedure is not delayed.
More about Review Guidelines you can find on the link http://publicationethics.org/files/Peer%20review%20guidelines_0.pdf
Plagiarism, where someone assumes another's ideas, words, or other creative expression as one's own, is a clear violation of scientific ethics. Plagiarism may also involve a violation of copyright law, punishable by legal action.
Plagiarism may constitute the following:
- Word for word, or almost word for word copying, or purposely paraphrasing portions of another author's work without clearly indicating the source or marking the copied fragment (for example, using quotation marks);
- Copying equations, figures or tables from someone else's paper without properly citing the source and/or without permission from the original author or the copyright holder.
Please note that all submissions are thoroughly checked for plagiarism.
Any paper which shows obvious signs of plagiarism will be automatically rejected and authors will be permanently or temporarily forbidden to publish in the journal.
If an attempt at plagiarism is found in a published paper, authors will be required to send a written apology to the authors of the original work.
Articles that have been published shall remain extant, exact and unaltered as long as it is possible. However, very occasionally, circumstances may arise where an article is published that must later be retracted. The main reason for withdrawal or retraction is to correct the mistake while preserving the integrity of science; it is not to punish the author.
Legal limitations of the publisher, copyright holder or author(s), infringements of professional ethical codes, such as multiple submissions, bogus claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data or the like require retraction of an article. Occasionally a retraction can be used to correct errors in submission or publication.
Standards for dealing with retractions have been developed by a number of library and scholarly bodies, and this practice has been adopted for article retraction by International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE): in the electronic version of the retraction note, a link is made to the original article. In the electronic version of the original article, a link is made to the retraction note where it is clearly stated that the article has been retracted. The original article is retained unchanged; save for a watermark on the PDF indicating on each page that it is “retracted.”
Open Access Policy
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE) is an Open Access Journal. All articles can be downloaded free of charge. Articles published in the Journal are Open-Access articles distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution - NonCommercial - NoDerivs 4.0.
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE) supports Green OA. Green OA is the practice of placing the accepted version of an author’s manuscript into a repository, making it freely accessible for everyone.
Benefits of open access for authors, include:
- OA articles are freely and permanently available online immediately upon publication, enabling broader distribution and increased visibility
- Authors can easily comply with the OA mandates of their institution or funding body as OA articles are usually published under a Creative Commons license
- The final version can be re-used and immediately deposited in any repository
- In most cases authors retain the copyright to their work
- Articles are citation tracked and included in all major bibliographic databases
- There are no space constraints, i.e. unlimited space for supplementary material including figures, extensive data and video footage
The journal allows readers to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of its articles and allow readers to use them for any other lawful purpose.
The journal do not charge authors an article processing charge (APC).
The journal International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE) allows authors to deposit Author's Post-print (accepted version) and Publisher's version/PDF in an institutional repository and non-commercial subject-based repositories, such as PubMed Central, Europe PMC, arXiv and other repositories or to publish it on Author's personal website (including social networking sites, such as ResearchGate, Academia.edu, etc.) and/or departmental website, at any time after publication on the website of the author’s institution in compliance with the Creative Commons Attibution – NonCommercial – NoDerrivatives 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), at any time after the publication in the journal. Publisher copyright and source must be acknowledged and a link must be made to the article's DOI.
Once the manuscript is accepted for publication, authors shall transfer the copyright to the Publisher. If the submitted manuscript is not accepted for publication by the journal, all rights shall be retained by the author(s).
Authors grant to the Publisher the following rights to the manuscript, including any supplemental material, and any parts, extracts or elements thereof:
- the right to reproduce and distribute the Manuscript in printed form, including print-on-demand;
- the right to produce prepublications, reprints, and special editions of the Manuscript;
- the right to translate the Manuscript into other languages;
- the right to reproduce the Manuscript using photomechanical or similar means including, but not limited to photocopy, and the right to distribute these reproductions;
- the right to reproduce and distribute the Manuscript electronically or optically on any and all data carriers or storage media – especially in machine readable/digitalized form on data carriers such as hard drive, CD-Rom, DVD, Blu-ray Disc (BD), Mini-Disk, data tape – and the right to reproduce and distribute the Article via these data carriers;
- the right to store the Manuscript in databases, including online databases, and the right of transmission of the Manuscript in all technical systems and modes;
- the right to make the Manuscript available to the public or to closed user groups on individual demand, for use on monitors or other readers (including e-books), and in printable form for the user, either via the internet, other online services, or via internal or external networks.