The aim of these guidelines is to share with you some criteria that the journal’s editors employ when evaluating manuscripts. The guidelines cannot address all substantive issues, but we do want to emphasize that, unless its methods, theory and evidence are all exceptionally strong, typically one research study leaves many questions unanswered and this is an important reason why papers that include more than one study are preferred by JESP editors.
JESP editors start from an attitude that is positive about efforts to advance the field, but rigorous in terms of evaluating evidence supporting a submitted paper’s conclusions. With this attitude in mind the following points may help authors to decide what points to address when preparing their manuscripts for JESP.
The guidelines also reflect the editors’ experiences with having to reject papers, or engage authors in lengthy and uncertain revisions, for the reasons mentioned below. Thus, the guidelines aim to spell out some basics in order to let authors know what kind of methods and reporting choices will give them the best chance at a favourable evaluation at JESP.