Peer Review Policy NYSTJ uses a double anonymous review process for peer-reviewed submissions, meaning that the authors’ and reviewers’ identities are not revealed to each other during or after the review.

The editor(s) will perform an initial review of all submissions and may reject papers that are clearly outside the scope of the journal. Manuscripts (MS from now onwards) within the scope will be sent to at least one outside expert reviewer. Reviewers will not receive or be able to view any documentation or metadata that includes individually identifiable author information. Authors will be provided with similarly anonymized reviewer comments to aid in the revision of their MS.

The review process takes, on average, 8-12 weeks. All articles considered suitable will undergo the anonymous review process, regardless of the contact prior to submission.

Peer Reviewers
NYSTJ strives to utilize reviewers from diverse identities, backgrounds, geographic areas, and career levels. Editors primarily draw upon those who have registered as reviewers on the NYSTJ website and have clearly articulated reviewer interest, although external reviewers will be sought when needed.

In the initial query, reviewers will be provided the article title and abstract and a due date for review completion. If the reviewer is able to review, the “masked” MS, the Review Guidelines, Ethical Expectations, an official review form and a 5-minute orientation video will be sent to the reviewer with the expected completion date. Reviews will be shared with authors anonymously and retained on the NYSTJ system.

Become a Reviewer
Interested potential reviewers should contact the Editorial Board (EB) and fill out the review form, including their updated CV and listing, in detail, their area of expertise and any prior review experiences. Potential reviewers are encouraged to openly seek guidance or support from the Journal if they feel they need additional orientation or information sharing.

Recusal Policy
The Journal’s EB strongly urges all reviewers to notify the Editorial Board immediately if they recognize the masked submission as one written by their close friends, co-workers or someone they have collaborated on multiple projects. The EB will then discuss the potential conflict on interest and make an appropriate decision related to reviewing.

For the purpose of this policy, plagiarism is defined as copying or reliance on work — including text, images and data—by others or yourself without proper attribution. Please be aware that you can plagiarize yourself; you must provide proper attribution in all cases where your previously published material, or previously published data or images are included in your manuscript.

Instances of plagiarised work detected prior to publication will result in rejection; instances of plagiarised work after the publication will result in retraction and the reason for retraction will be posted on the journal’s website.

Special issue Policy
NYST Journal no longer publishes guest-edited issues. However, on occasion, the Journal may publish a special-themed issue. Such issues are usually supervised by the house EB, but may have a special visiting co-editor, who can collaborate on the review process but would not be given access to Journal infrastructure or paperwork. This decision was unanimously made by the EB because of the challenges of managing guest-edited issues.

Criteria for Authorship
It is important that the correct list of authors is attributed to an article. As NYSTJ notes: “Authorship confers credit and has important academic, social, and financial implications.”

All authors listed on a submission must have given prior approval to have their name attributed to the file(s) that are being submitted and they agree to the publication. The corresponding author has the responsibility to ensure that all authors qualify for, and have agreed to, authorship of the submission. They are also responsible for informing all coauthors of relevant editorial information during the review process. Only corresponding authors’ emails are published and they are responsible for future communications with the Journal or with the readership.

Our recommendations are based on the NYSTJ criteria for authorship. Authors must have:

  • made substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; contributed to the drafting of the work, or revising it critically for important intellectual content;
  • provided final approval of the versions to be published;
  • agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that the questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated or resolved;
  • agreed to be named on the author list, and approved of the full author list. (Original source used with permission: Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication)

Defamation, Retraction and Removal
NYSTJ does not support publishing false statements that harm the reputation of individuals, groups, or organizations. The authors are expected to express critical opinions in an objective, well-supported or well-substantiated manner, and the language used to express such opinions or scholarly conclusions is expected to be of non-malicious and non-confrontational nature. All research, or theoretical conclusions, is expected to be fully supported by verifiable facts or consensus; or by a clear description of selection and analysis criteria without any ambiguity. Articles, opinions, conclusions or reviews that – in the view of the Editorial and Advisory Board, may be written in a malicious, self-serving, or unhelpful manner using extreme, or non-collegial language will not be published.

Retractions, Corrections, and Expressions of Concern
The Editorial and Advisory Board will consider retractions, corrections or expressions of concern in line with COPE’s Retraction Guidelines. If an author is found to have made an error, the journal will issue a corrigendum. If the Journal is found to have made an error, they will issue an erratum. Retractions are usually reserved for articles that are so seriously flawed that their findings or conclusions should not be relied upon, or are based on incomplete research frameworks, or unclear data collection and analyses that have lead to false conclusions or overgeneralizations that have no clear base in reality. Articles that contain substantial plagiarism will be retracted. In case of damaging language used in a published article, the Journal reserves the right to make minor changes such as those which would likely occur during copyediting, typesetting or proofreading in order to remove or correct such errors on its own accord or when deemed absolutely necessary.

Removal Guidelines
In exceptional cases, articles may be removed. Instances include concerns that the article is defamatory, violates personal privacy, or confidentiality laws. A notice will be published on the website clearly stating the reason for article removal.

Integrity of Record
The Journal maintains a record of each review and publication stage, from submission to final print.

First Drafted November 2021 with Advisory Board Approval Vote