The Global Science Press (GSP) is pleased to consider a variety of submission types：
Research Article: An original research article submitted to GSP is expected to present well-founded experimental work, contributing a substantial body of new knowledge to their respective fields. A comprehensive research article should comprise the following sections: Abstract, Keywords, Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, Discussion, Conclusions (optional), and the most recent and pertinent references in the subject area.
Review: Reviews featured in GSP serve as a comprehensive and analytical examination of the existing literature in a particular domain of academic inquiry. These reviews aim to meticulously identify current voids or challenges in the field while providing constructive insights and recommendations for prospective research endeavors. It is essential to note that reviews should avoid presenting any novel or unpublished data. The prescribed structure for review articles encompasses the following components: Abstract, Keywords, Introduction, Relevant Sections, Discussion, Conclusions, and Future Directions.
Communication: Communications are short articles aiming to present groundbreaking preliminary results or significant findings, which often constitute integral components of broader, multi-year studies. Moreover, Communications may encompass state-of-the-art methodologies, innovative experiments, or advancements in technology and materials. In terms of structure, Communications follow a format closely resembling that of an article.
Editorial: Editorials are non-peer-reviewed texts dedicated to announcing the launch of a new journal, a new section, a new Editor-in-Chief, a Special Issue, or an invited editorial. The principal content of an Editorial should offer a concise introduction, outlining the purpose and objectives of the Editorial—whether it is to present a new journal, close a Special Issue, or report on a pressing topic. It is imperative to note that Editorials must refrain from presenting unpublished or original data. Nevertheless, they should include a Conflict of Interest statement.
An introductory cover letter is a threshold for journal editors to have a quick look at highlights of manuscripts or to know how significant the research is, and it will also be helpful to speed up the decision on whether further peer review is warranted. We encourage authors to prepare a cover letter in which the following elements should be included:
You are also at liberty to suggest reviewers included, or you can request that certain individuals be excluded from peer review. The reviewers you recommend should avoid your colleagues, acquaintances or those whom you have collaborated with on a previously published work. Explicit rationales concerning reviewer exclusion should be provided in the cover letter. Please note that the cover letter will not be transmitted to peer reviewers and will only be reviewed by journal editors.
Kindly ensure that the submitted papers adhere to proper formatting standards in WORD. We kindly request that you consult the guidelines provided by the journal to which you intend to submit your work in order to access the appropriate template. A well-structured format is essential to facilitate a seamless transition into the editorial process, thereby contributing to the overall efficiency of your publication journey.
Submitted manuscripts are expected to exhibit proficiency in the English language. It is strongly advisable for authors to consider engaging the services of a professional English editing service or seek the assistance of a native English speaker to review and refine the language prior to publication or during the revision process. In the event that an English editing service is utilized, we kindly request that authors furnish the Editorial Office with a copy of the editing certificate.
Before submitting to us, there are a lot of things you need to consider and check. We create a checklist which serves as a quick reference guide to assist authors in the submission process and to avoid any potential delays, risks or rejections.
Submission to us will be taken to imply that there is no significant overlap between the submitted manuscript and any other manuscripts from the same authors under consideration or in press elsewhere. The authors must obtain copies of all related manuscripts with any overlap in authorship that are under consideration or in press elsewhere. If a related manuscript is submitted elsewhere while the manuscript is under consideration at GSP journal, a copy of the related manuscript must be sent to the editors. The publisher will not shoulder any responsibilities should there be any claims for compensation due to the misappropriation of materials.
The primary affiliation for each author should be the institution where the majority of their work was done. If an author has subsequently moved, the current address may also be stated.
If the manuscript includes personal information or communication, please provide a written statement of permission from any person who is quoted. Permission by email is acceptable.
We reserve the right to reject or retract a manuscript even after it has been accepted or published if it becomes apparent that there are serious problems with the scientific content, or our publishing policies are violated.
Authors are suggested to submit their manuscripts via our online system by clicking “Submit” for registration or login first. With a streamlined process and guidance for each step, authors can upload manuscript files (text, figures and supplementary materials) directly via this system and check on the status of their manuscripts during the review process. If the authors cannot get access to our system or fail to submit online, you can turn to submit by sending an email to our journal editors whose contact mail address is provided on the journal page in contact section. We will respond to you quickly upon receiving your submission files.
3.4 Author Workflow
Upon the submission of a manuscript for publication, the Editorial Office will undertake a comprehensive review to ascertain its suitability for the editorial pre-check.
After the completion of the technical pre-check, the manuscript will be forwarded to the academic editor of the journal for review. In cases where the academic editor determines that the manuscript either lacks the requisite quality for the normal review process or does not align with the journal’s thematic scope, the editorial office reserves the authority to decline the manuscript without further processing.
In instances where the academic editor deems the submitted manuscript to be of satisfactory quality and within the purview of the journal’s focus, the manuscript will be entrusted to an editorial assistant for subsequent processing. The academic editor is empowered to nominate two reviewers for a particular manuscript, based on their expertise and experience.
Please note that if the manuscript is authored by one of the Editors serving on the journal’s editorial board, it will be assigned for scrutiny to another editor who does not possess any conflicts of interest with the authors.
Global Environment Science employs a single anonymized peer-review procedure. External reviewers may or may not be selected from the list of potential reviewers proposed by the authors or the academic editor.
A review report provides the Editors with feedback on the quality of the manuscript under consideration, while simultaneously offering authors invaluable insights into enhancing their papers to meet the publication standards of the journal. While confidential comments addressed to the editors are not disclosed to the authors, any constructive feedback that can contribute to the enhancement of the manuscript’s quality will be conveyed to the authors for their consideration. Reviewers are expected to address the following aspects in their review reports:
1) Is the manuscript sufficiently comprehensive to ensure clarity of understanding? If not, how can it be improved?
2) Have the authors provided adequate evidence to support their claims?
3) Have the authors impartially addressed previous research findings?
4) Does the paper furnish sufficient methodological details to facilitate the replication of experiments?
Reviewers are expected to provide their reports in a timely manner (ideally within two weeks). Timely reviews significantly expedite the publication process, benefiting not only the authors but also the broader scientific community.
Reviewers are required to submit their assessments of the manuscripts, accompanied by their recommendations, to the designated academic editor. The available options for their recommendations include:
1) Accept Submission
2) Accept after Revisions
3) Revise and Re-review
4) Decline Submission
The review reports are edited by the editorial assistant, particularly when they encompass confidential information. Reviewers should include such comments in the confidential section of the review form, exclusively accessible to the editorial team. In cases where the reviewer’s report does not meet the prescribed quality standards, the academic editor holds the authority to request the involvement of an additional reviewer from the editorial assistant.
Upon receipt of reports from all reviewers, the academic editor is vested with the responsibility to formulate one of the subsequent editorial recommendations:
1) Accept Submission
2) Request Revisions
3) Decline Submission
If the academic editor recommends “Accept Submission”, the manuscript is accepted for publication.
If the academic editor recommends “Request Revisions”, this directive is promptly communicated to the authors. The authors are expected to diligently revise their manuscripts in alignment with the modifications suggested by the reviewers and ensure the timely submission of the revised manuscripts. Once the revised manuscript is submitted, the original reviewers are re-engaged and requested to evaluate the updated version. Alongside their review reports on the revised manuscript, the reviewers provide recommendations that may include “Accept Submission”, “Revisions Required”, or “Decline Submission”. The academic editor subsequently formulates an editorial recommendation, which can be “Accept Submission”, “Revisions Required” or “Decline Submission”. In cases where the academic editor advocates for the rejection of the manuscript, the decision of rejection is enacted immediately.