Tips for Quality Publishing; Lessons from the Neuroscience Editorial Team.

Journal: Neuroscience

Volume: 

Issue: 

Year of Publication: 

Affiliated Institutions:  Center for Behavioral Sciences and Mental Health, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy. Department of Human Biology, Neuroscience Institute, University of Cape Town, South Africa. Institute of Neurobiology, UNAM, Mexico. Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health, University of Melbourne, Parkville Vic., Australia. School of Arts & Sciences, Health Psychology Program, Massachusetts College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Boston Massachusetts, United States . The Graduate School of Core Ethics and Frontier Sciences, Ritsumeikan University Tojiin Kitamachi -, Kita-ku, Kyoto, JAPAN -. Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, UK; Department of Psychiatry, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, USA. School of Health and Biomedical Sciences, RMIT University, Melbourne, Vic., Australia . Electronic address: Sarah.Spencer@rmit.edu.au. Center for Neuroimmunology and Glial Biology, Institute of Molecular Medicine, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas, United States . School of Basic Medical Sciences, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China ; College of Basic Medicine, Inner Mongolia Medical University, Hohhot, China .

Abstract summary 

In pursuit of excellence in scholarly publishing, the Neuroscience editorial team shares valuable insights that are essential for authors, reviewers, and the broader scientific community. Firstly, we emphasize that impactful research is built on rigorous study design and execution. Beyond fundamental methodological safeguards such as randomization and blinded analysis, we highlight the importance of thoughtfully selecting study models, with deliberate attention to biological variables like sex and gender, as well as appropriate nomenclature. Secondly, as technological innovations reshape research landscapes, we advocate for combining methodological rigor with suitable analytical tools to ensure robust data collection and transparent reporting. Thirdly, for manuscripts reaching the revision stage, we frame the response to reviewers as a strategic process that requires objectivity, diplomacy, and evidence-based rebuttals where necessary. Finally, we call for intentional prioritization of inclusivity and diversity across all stages of scientific inquiry - from laboratory collaborations to editorial decisions - and urge stakeholders to actively counteract implicit biases in manuscript evaluation and citation practices. By embedding these principles into the scientific workflow, we argue that the research community can foster not only greater rigor but also a more equitable and innovative scholarly ecosystem.

Authors & Co-authors:  Cirulli Francesca F Dangarembezi Rachael R de Lafuente Victor V Hannan Anthony J AJ Kentner Amanda C AC Mima Tatsuya T Morris Laurel L Spencer Sarah J SJ Wu Long-Jun LJ Zhang Chen C

Study Outcome 

Source Link: Visit source

Statistics
Citations : 
Authors :  10
Identifiers
Doi : S0306-4522(25)00192-7
SSN : 1873-7544
Study Population
Male,Female
Mesh Terms
Other Terms
Study Design
Study Approach
Country of Study
Publication Country
United States