Senior Research Scientist & Director, Yale Initiative for the Study of Ancient Pyrotechnology
A GUIDE TO PUBLISHING IN JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL SCIENCE: REPORTS
I am Co-Editor-in-Chief for Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports along with my colleague, Professor Danielle Macdonald, and we work together to shape the journal and shepherd appropriate submissions through review and publication. It is always exciting to be first ones to see new and exciting research conducted around the world.
​​
Publishing companies understandably like to have standardized user experiences, ​consistent formatting, author guidance precisely worded by their legal offices, and so on. That might work well for most of the journals in their portfolios. But archaeological science is inherently highly multidisciplinary and does not fit the usual mold.
​
Consider, for example, a research article on osteoarchaeology. Such a manuscript could include a broad range of scientific data – stable isotope analysis, radiocarbon dating, multivariate statistics of three-dimensional geometric morphometrics, etc. – in support of an archaeological research question. But there is more to consider: Were best professional and ethical practices followed? Were appropriate permissions obtained? Was there consultation with descendant communities? Do authors use the terms "sex" and "gender" according to professional guidelines? Are photographs of human remains used appropriately or would illustrations suffice instead? And so on...
​
Few scholarly fields have such a diverse range of considerations. Archaeological science does.
​
What follows bellow is an endeavor to pull together all of the author instructions, editor tips, common mistakes and oversights, submission checklist items, and other frequently asked questions in one convenient place. Much of what is here, it must be noted, is not official Elsevier policy. Instead, it is editorial guidance. What are the expectations that we, not only as editors but also as professional archaeologists, bring to our assessments of manuscripts? This guide is intended to help authors understand what we, as editors, look for and how to publish in a journal such as JASREP.
This list should not be considered exhaustive, and we expect authors to follow ethical standards and best publishing practices, as laid out by professional archaeological associations. For example, following guidance from the World Archaeological Council, we scrutinize and make decisions about submissions involving active war zones or areas possessed by military force, increasing the likelihood of looted materials or illegally seized archaeological sites.
​
This is also a website that we expect to edit from time to time as policies need to be added, clarified, or revised.
​
Thank you for your interest in publishing in the journal, and we look forward to receiving your submission here.
AIMS & SCOPE
Here is our official Aims & Scope statement (last revised Sept 2024):
​
Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports is aimed at all scholars, from anthropological archaeologists to scientific specialists, who are engaged with the application of scientific techniques and methods throughout the entire field of archaeology. The journal focuses on the results of scientific investigations applied to archaeological research questions, problems, and debates of wide interest and, in turn, their significance for understanding behaviors in the past. It also provides a forum, after consultation with the editors, for reviews or debates about important issues or “hot topics” in scientific archaeology and their impacts in the broader field.
​
Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports publishes papers of excellent archaeological science, and both scientific and archaeological aspects of the research should be well represented within all manuscripts submitted to the journal. The majority of our accepted submissions are Research Articles in which a scientific technique sheds light on a clearly defined archaeological research question or debate. Shorter Communications, Reviews, and other article formats are also welcome, but interested authors are encouraged to consult with the editors prior to submitting manuscripts in these formats.
​
Research should be demonstrably contextualized within the region and period of interest (that is, it is situated in the relevant geographic, chronological, historical, etc. contexts) and, ideally, within a topic or question of broad interest or significance to a global audience. Applications of scientific techniques must be underpinned by clear archaeological or methodological research questions and be set within established and/or developing research frameworks. The submission of papers focused around the analysis of single objects or small sample sizes (e.g., a low number of sherds) and papers situated in conservation studies are discouraged, unless of exceptional quality and/or international significance.
​
Submissions within our publishing scope will be considered by an Editor-in-Chief and, after passing desk review, will be reviewed by at least two peer reviewers. Submissions might also be handled by Associate Editors with relevant subject expertise. We aim to reach a first decision within 6 weeks.
​
We welcome suggestions for thematic sets of papers arising from meetings focused on any aspect of scientific archaeology, and we publish Special Issues of high-quality papers deriving from conferences and symposia on the archaeological sciences.
​
We welcome submissions from scholars anywhere in the world and at any career stage, and we especially encourage contributions from early career researchers as well as archaeologists from under-represented communities or countries.
ARTICLE TYPES
Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports publishes the following peer-reviewed article types:
Research Article
An article documenting original research and showing how that research contributes to the body of archaeological knowledge, understanding, and theory in a given area. This is the most common article type. Typically, Research Articles have a target length of 5000–8000 words (excluding references, captions, abstract, highlights, etc.), although longer submissions (10,000 words or more) of high significance will be considered. The word count is flexible, especially when the reviewers or editors request additional information during the peer-review process. Research Articles will also have a sufficient number of figures and tables to document and interpret the research, but there is no strict limit. Research Articles often have Supplementary Online Materials, providing additional space for detailed methods, full datasets, etc.
Short Communication
A short article succinctly communicating novel research results or substantive comment about prior research. It may also be used to clarify or otherwise further the discussion around debates or timely issues of broad archaeological interest. Short Communications commonly have a target length of 1500–3000 words (excluding references, captions, abstract, highlights, etc.), usually have fewer than four figures and four tables, and often do not have Supplementary Online Materials.
Review Article
An article or extended essay that gives a critical evaluation of the current state of the research on a particular topic. Typically, Review Articles are written by authors with demonstrated expertise in the topic. Authors interested in submitting a Review Article are strongly encouraged to reach out to the editors in advance, and the editors may request a short synopsis or outline of the proposed submission.
Extended Research Article
Although not yet a formal submission category in the system, this article type should be specified in the cover letter. It is intended as a longer-than-usual research article documenting a very substantial body of original research and making an especially significant contribution to archaeological knowledge, understanding, and theory in a given area. Too long to be considered a typical Research Article but too short to publish as a full Monograph. Authors interested in submitting an Extended Research Article are strongly encouraged to reach out to editors in advance, including an estimated word count for the manuscript. Lengthy manuscripts can be burdensome for reviewers, so additional review time may be needed.
Comment
Authors who seek to comment specifically on the content of a recently published article in the journal can submit a Comment (target length of 1000–2000 words with 2 figures and/or tables). The original authors will be welcome to write a Reply of similar length. Both Comments and Replies are peer-reviewed. No further responses are considered after one Comment and one Reply. Typically, Comments are considered only within 6 months of the initial article’s publication, and Replies must be submitted within 2 months after notification about the Comment. Whenever possible, the journal strives to publish a Comment and its Reply in the same issue.
Any of these article types can be submitted, in theory, either to a regular issue of the journal or to an announced and open Virtual Special Issue.
We do not routinely publish Book Reviews, Letters to the Editor, News, or other article types.
DECLARATION OF AI TOOLS
Large Language Models (LLMs; e.g., ChatGPT) and other artificial intelligence (AI) tools can play useful and acceptable roles in scientific research and publishing. However, LLMs and AI cannot be held accountable for their output in the way that human researchers must be accountable as authors. Nor can LLMs and AI tools be said to generate “original work,” the foundation of scientific publishing. Authors who use LLMs and AI must be fully transparent about its use and must declare and describe its application to readers.
The most common acceptable use is for AI-assisted copy editing, which is the use of AI to improve human-generated texts for overall readability and to check for errors in grammar, spelling, scholarly tone, etc. Such tools may make changes in wording and formatting for existing text; however, authors cannot use them for the creation of generative text or other autonomous content. Authors must also be certain that AI-assisted edits are still reflective of their original work. Use of AI-assisted editing must be declared in the Acknowledgments: “During the preparation of this manuscript, the author(s) used [name of tool or service] to [reason(s); e.g., improve the English grammar, ensure proper tone or style].
In general, use of AI-generated images is not allowed. If essential, however, authors must provide a complete description of the process and declare the AI use in the figure caption. Ideally, authors will place a watermark or note on the image itself that it was AI-generated.
AI tools such as machine learning can also be acceptable when used as a means to extract and analyze insights derived from data or other materials (e.g., data mining). In such cases, authors must declare such AI use in the Methods and Materials section as well as provide a complete descript of the process, including appropriate details and citations. For example, authors should provide the name and version of AI tools or algorithms to aid reproducibility.
Finally, it is unethical to use AI (data mining, machine learning, LLMs, etc.) as a means to produce a manuscript outside of one’s research and professional competencies (without appropriate coauthors). For example, an AI expert should not feed cancer studies into a model and generate a therapeutic recommendation without an oncologist collaborating.
​
REVIEW AND DECISION TERMS
To aid the reviewing and revision process, we ask that reviewers and authors keep in mind the following descriptions for the journal’s post-review recommendation categories:
Accept. With the exception of small errors and edits that could be handled through proof corrections, the manuscript is ready to be published essentially as-is. No further revisions are needed before publication.
Minor Revisions. The manuscript and research are both sound, but the manuscript needs revisions that could be accomplished in one or two weeks. This includes, for example, adding some important citations, rewriting occasional sentences or paragraphs for clarity, explaining interpretations with additional clarity, refining relevant word choices, proofreading for spelling and grammar, changing the abstract or title, etc. Often, but not always, involves no further review, only editorial assessment. Reviewers are happy to see the submission accepted and published after recommendations are addressed.
Moderate Revisions. The research is essentially sound but might require additional effort with respect to its description and/or interpretation (e.g., use of appropriate statistical tests, creation of a summary data table). The manuscript requires more revision effort than that for Minor Revisions, such as more extensive English language editing, additional paragraphs or sections, further interpretation and discussion, added archaeological context for international readers, reorganization of the manuscript, etc. Most submissions with Moderate Revisions will need some concerted effort over the course of a few weeks. Often, but not always, involves a re-review by one of the previous reviewers.
Major Revisions. The revisions may necessitate much of the initial 60-day revision period. The research is sound at its core, but additional analyses or experiments might be needed to support the results and/or interpretations. Reviewers might disagree that the results support the authors’ interpretation and request further support or reconsideration of the interpretation. Furthermore, the manuscript may require more revision and/or reorganization, and the language level may pose a barrier to the research being properly understood. Often, but not always, involves re-review by one or more of the previous reviewers and/or a new reviewer. This decision is neither a conditional acceptance nor a conditional rejection.
Reject. The research exhibits serious, perhaps fundamental, flaws that could take a few months to address, if at all; or these flaws still remain after Major Revisions, suggesting that the author is unable or unwilling to make the necessary changes. In certain instances, it is appropriate for manuscripts with a Reject decision to be eventually resubmitted after their serious flaws have been addressed.
CHECKLIST: RESEARCH ETHICS & BEST PRACTICES
◻︎ The research and its publication has been approved by all authors and, as necessary, the relevant authorities where the work was conducted. Consultation with Indigenous communities and descendent groups may also be legally required and/or constitute professional best practices for research involving sites or objects of high significance in certain parts of the world. Where applicable, authors must indicate that they have consulted with appropriate stakeholders regarding the research and its public presentation.
◻︎ For research involving human remains (e.g., bone, tissues, aDNA), authors must indicate that they have consulted with descendent communities, from the initial design to publication. It is essential that any research/publication permits and ethical approvals be obtained from each of the relevant authorities at the national, regional, and/or university/museum level. Consultation and/or permissions must be addressed in (1) the cover letter that accompanies the submission and (2) the Methods section. The editors may also request that authors share documentation of consultation and/or permissions. In cases of experiments involving recent human remains, it is essential that permissions and approvals have been obtained from the relevant authorities at national, hospital, and university level and from next of kin (i.e., these rules can vary by institution, state, country, etc.).
◻︎ Any photographs of human remains should be essential to the presentation of the results, especially when included in the main manuscript. If photographs of specific features are necessary (e.g., skeletal lesions in a paleopathology paper), photographs should focus on those areas. If not crucial, authors are encouraged to consider replacing photographs with drawings, digital scans, or other imagery and/or placing photographs in the supplementary online materials.
◻︎ Any research involving living human subjects must comply with all relevant regulations of institutional bodies (i.e., Intuitional Review Boards) or other organizations, depending on where the research is conducted. Some research in experimental archaeology (e.g., human trials of tool use) or ethnoarchaeology (e.g., working with traditional craftspeople) may require such approvals.
◻︎ Submissions should follow best practices when using sex- and gender-based analyses. When present, authors should explicitly report what definitions of sex and/or gender their research follows in order to avoid any ambiguities or potential conflation of terms and their corresponding concepts. The Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) guidelines and checklist are potentially useful resources. In general, sex refers to a suite of biological attributes, especially physiological ones (e.g., internal and external anatomy, chromosomes), and it is typically designated at birth on the basis of external anatomy. In contrast, gender refers to socially constructed roles and identities in a given historical and cultural context, and it affects how individuals view themselves and others.
◻︎ All authors must disclose any financial and personal relationships with other people or organizations that could inappropriately influence their work or present the appearance of bias. Examples of potential competing interests include past or present employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding types. A normal working relationship with a manufacturer would not need to be declared; however, providing paid or otherwise compensated consultancy or training for them does need to be declared, even if there was no tangible influence on the reported research.
◻︎ Submissions must provide details about the provenance of studied materials. Research based on archaeological materials with unknown or dubious provenance might not be considered for publication. Authors should document the institutional repositories of studied materials in either the Methods and Materials section or the Acknowledgments, and figures will include any relevant field or museum numbers for artifacts documented in those images. Authors must fully abide by relevant national, international, and institutional regulations and laws. The journal will not publish materials suspected to have been collected and/or exported from their countries of origin without observance of those regulations and laws, nor will the journal publish studies on materials held in private collections. In any case, editors may request additional information, support, or evidence.
◻︎ Use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools is declared to editors and readers. AI can be useful and have acceptable roles in scientific research and publishing, but authors who use AI, especially Large Language Models (LLMs), must be fully transparent and must declare and describe its use in a submission. For example, use of LLM-assisted editing must be declared in the cover letter and in the Acknowledgments (e.g., “During the preparation of this manuscript, the author(s) used [tool or service] to edit and improve the English grammar and style”). If machine learning was employed to analyze data (e.g., data mining), authors must similarly disclose its use in the Methods section and give a complete description of the process (e.g., name and version, parameters, relevant citations).
CHECKLIST: SUBMISSION COMPONENTS
◻︎ The required cover letter includes statements about the research and its interest to our readership, that the research has not been previously published and is not under consideration elsewhere, that list relevant permits and permissions, that note potential conflicts of interest, etc. It is allowed for (and helpful for the editors and journal staff to know if) the research to have appeared in the form of a conference abstract, lecture, academic thesis, preprint, etc.
◻︎ A separate highlights file lists four or five brief, bullet-point summaries of the work, each no longer than 85 characters (including spaces), is required to aid web searches and indexing.
◻︎ The manuscript has been proofread and conforms to standard English grammar and rules. If the English of a manuscript is difficult to understand, it may result in reviewing delays or rejection on that basis. The journal’s leadership recognizes that there is no such thing as “perfect English” (English speakers from the United States, England, Canada, and Australia will sometimes use different grammar), but clarity in communication is essential.
◻︎ In most cases, use the International System of Units (SI) and include a space between values and units: e.g., 0.1 µm, 1.0 km, 2.0 mg, 3.0° C, 4.0 ml. If other units are mentioned, please also give their SI equivalent, when applicable. Some common units (e.g., parts per million or ppm) are not technically SI notation (e.g., 1 ppm = 1 mg/Kg) but nevertheless may be used. Some fields (e.g., archaeomagnetism) might use non-SI units following internationally accepted conventions.
◻︎ The article title appears at the top of the first page of the manuscript. The title is concise, informative, and encapsulates the core message or finding, and it should mention the geographic area, cultural context, and/or country concerned, given the journal’s international readership.
◻︎ All manuscript authors are listed beneath the title and appear in the very same order as entered into the submission system. Differences between the two authors lists may be flagged by Elsevier’s Ethics Office. All authors are strongly encouraged to provide their 16-digit ORCIDs. Any author may include their name in another script in parentheses behind the English transliteration.
◻︎ Any changes to authorship have followed Elsevier procedures in order to avoid being by flagged by the Ethics Office. Any addition, deletion, or rearrangement of names in the authorship list must be approved by the journal Editors. To request such a change, the editors must receive the following from the corresponding author: (a) the reason for the change in author list and (b) written confirmation (e.g., e-mail) from all authors that they agree. This must include confirmation from the author being added or removed. If a manuscript has already been published, any change will result in a corrigendum (except for cases that involve Elsevier’s name change policy).
◻︎ One author has been designated as the corresponding author (who is not necessarily the submitting and/or first author) with an active e-mail address (or addresses) listed on the first page of the manuscript file.
◻︎ The abstract is no longer than 250 words, provides an accurate summary of the article (e.g., aims, methods, results, significance), and mentions the area and time period involved.
◻︎ Three to seven keywords are used to make the paper more visible for web searches and indexing. They should highlight core aspects of the paper but should not repeat terms in the title. Single- or two-word keywords are preferable to long phrases.
◻︎ The manuscript file has both line and page numbers to aid the editors and reviewers. If line and/or page numbers are absent, a submission will be delayed and returned to the author.
◻︎ The manuscript file should use a standard font and font size of at least 10 pt, one-and-a-half or double line spacing, and text in a single column (i.e., authors should not try to replicate the final formatting for an article in the journal – the production office will handle such formatting).
◻︎ In most instances, the manuscript should use standard, named and numbered sections to convey important information about the research, typically: Introduction, Background, Materials, Methods, Results, Interpretation, Discussion, and Conclusions. Any second-level sections should be numbered using a decimal place (e.g., 2.1, 2.2, 2.3), and so forth.
◻︎ All relevant analytical data, instrument output, statistical code, etc. are included in the tables of the main manuscript or the supplementary online materials.
◻︎ Any abbreviations and acronyms, even those seemingly standard in the field, should be defined with their first occurrence in the text and used consistently throughout the manuscript.
◻︎ When relevant, Linnean binomials (i.e., two-part scientific names) should be used for the taxonomic identification of all but the most common animals. The species name or abbreviation should follow all binomials at first mention. Taxonomic usage should, in general, follow standards set out in the international codes for zoological and botanical nomenclature.
​
◻︎ Footnotes have avoided (but may be allowed when sparse and appropriate, especially for clarifications).
◻︎ Image sources are listed in all figure captions. Permission must be obtained in writing by the authors to use any copyrighted materials from other sources (including images found on the internet). If permission is not required for an explicit reason (e.g., the copyright holder has waved their rights, the image is in the public domain, the image has been shared via a Creative Commons license), this basis must be listed in the figure caption along with any required acknowledgements.
◻︎ The Acknowledgements section includes (but is not limited to) identifying who provided financial support for the conduct of the research and/or preparation of the manuscript and to briefly describe if the sponsor(s) had any role(s) in study design, collection and interpretation of data, and so forth. Listed grants should include relevant numbers and principal investigator/awardee names. Individuals who provided help during the research but either did not meet the criteria for authorship or declined inclusion as an author should be listed here as well.
◻︎ References listed in the Bibliography at the end of the manuscript are cited in the main text, and vice versa. The journal uses standard in-text citations (e.g., “Smith, 1990”), not numbers.
◻︎ Properly formatted bibliographic references with DOIs/ISBNs (when possible) will lead to fewer delays in the proofing stage. Authors are encouraged to use bibliographic software to aid with this step. For example, Zotero, for example, is free, open-source, and multi-platform, and it has the appropriate “Elsevier–Harvard (with titles)” citation style as a preset option.
◻︎ An author statement describes the author contributions using the relevant CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) format.
◻︎ Text in figures use a simple, consistent, common font size and style (e.g., Arial, Helvetica, or Calibri for sans serif text; Times New Roman, Times, or Cambria for serif text).
◻︎ Color in figures is used in ways that aid in their interpretation (ideally after consulting online resources for color schemes effective for readers with various forms of color blindness).
◻︎ Tables are consistent with the journal’s standard style (e.g., no vertical lines, no shading), which will minimize delays during publication stages after acceptance (e.g., formatting, proofing).
◻︎ Ages and dates are reported clearly and consistently. Ages may be reported in a or yr (years ago), ka (thousands of years ago), or Ma (millions of years ago). Calendar dates should be expressed as using either CE (“Common Era”; previously AD or “Anno Domini”) or BCE (“Before Common Era”; previously BC for “Before Christ”). Any radiocarbon ages should be documented and explained in the main text and/or supplementary online materials (e.g., laboratory number, uncertainty, dated material, pre-treatment method, calibration curve). Calibrated ages or dates should be reported with "cal yr BP" or similar indicators. Other techniques (e.g., U/Th, K/Ar, OSL, cosmogenic isotopes) should include similar information (e.g., uncertainty level, analytical and data treatment protocols, parameters, corrections). Models (e.g., Bayesian approaches) should include relevant details (e.g., software, probability distributions) and code in the supplementary online materials.
AUTHOR INFO: BEFORE YOU BEGIN
Some, but not all, of these policies can be found on Elsevier's website.
​
Publishing ethics
Please see Elsevier's guide on Publishing Ethics. If you have ethical concerns regarding a paper, whether about a published article or a manuscript currently under review, please contact the Editors-in-Chief first. The Editors will then follow the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines.
Declaration of conflicts of interest
Corresponding authors, on behalf of all the authors of a submission, must disclose any financial and personal relationships with other people or organizations that could inappropriately influence (bias) their work. Examples of potential conflicts of interest include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. All authors, including those without competing interests to declare, should provide the relevant information to the corresponding author (which, where relevant, may specify they have nothing to declare).
Authors must disclose any interests in two places:
1. A conflict of interest statement in the manuscript file, ordinarily placed right before the Acknowledgments section. If there are no interests to declare, then please state “None,” and if published, the final version will include the following: “The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.”
2. Detailed disclosures as part of a separate Declaration of Interest in the submission system, which constitutes part of the journal's official records. It is important for the information to be declared in both places and to match.
More information on Elsevier policies is available here.
Submission declaration and verification​
Submission of a manuscript to the journal implies that:
1. The research documented has not been published previously (except in the form of a published conference abstract, a lecture or similar presentation, or an academic thesis; see 'Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication' for more information,
2. It is not under consideration for publication elsewhere,
3. The research itself and its final publication has been approved by all authors and by the responsible authorities (including any relevant Indigenous communities/descendent groups) where the work was conducted, and
4. If accepted, it will not be published elsewhere in the same form, in English or in any other language, including electronically without written consent of the copyright holder.
To verify compliance, your article may be checked by Crossref Similarity Check and other originality/duplicate checking software.
Preprints
Preprints can be shared anywhere at any time, in line with Elsevier's sharing policy. Sharing your preprints (e.g., on a preprint server) does not count as prior publication.
Preprint posting on SSRN
In support of open science, this journal offers its authors a free preprint posting service. Preprints provide early registration and dissemination of your research, which facilitates early citations and collaboration.
During submission to Editorial Manager, you can choose to release your manuscript publicly as a preprint on the preprint server SSRN once it enters peer-review with the journal. Your choice will have no effect on the editorial process or outcome with the journal. Please note that the corresponding author is expected to seek approval from all co-authors before agreeing to release the manuscript publicly on SSRN.
You will be notified via email when your preprint is posted online and a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) is assigned. Your preprint will remain globally available free to read whether the journal accepts or rejects your manuscript. For more information about posting to SSRN, please consult the SSRN FAQs.
Use of inclusive language
Inclusive language acknowledges diversity and differences, conveys respect, and promotes equality. Manuscript content should (1) make no assumptions about the beliefs or commitments of our diverse readership; (2) include no statements or imagery which might imply that one individual is superior to another on the grounds of age, gender, race, ethnicity, culture, sexual orientation, disability, or health condition; and (3) use inclusive language throughout. Authors should ensure that writing is free from bias, stereotypes, slang, reference to dominant culture and/or cultural assumptions. We advise to seek gender neutrality by using plural nouns (archaeologists, researchers, scientists, individuals) to avoid using "he, she," or "he/she." The archaic inclusion of gendered language (e.g., “Neanderthal man, early man, man-made”) should also be avoided. Descriptors that refer to an individual’s attributes such as age, gender, race, ethnicity, culture, sexual orientation, disability, etc. should be avoided unless they are relevant, valid, and necessary. In computer coding terminology, we recommend to avoid potentially offensive or exclusionary terms (e.g., use “primary” and “secondary” instead of “master” and “slave”). These are only guidelines meant as a point of reference to help identify appropriate language but are by no means exhaustive or definitive.
Reporting on sex and gender
Authors should follow the best practices in their field when integrating sex- and gender-based analyses into their research. When present, authors should explicitly report what definitions of sex and/or gender their research follows in order to avoid any ambiguities or potential conflation of terms and their corresponding concepts. The Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) guidelines and checklist are potentially useful resources for authors. In general, sex refers to a suite of biological attributes, especially physiological ones (e.g., internal and external anatomy, chromosomes), and it is typically designated at birth (i.e., male/female) on the basis of external anatomy. In contrast, gender refers to socially constructed roles and identities within a given historical and cultural context, and it is affects how individuals view themselves and others, how they act and interact, and how power and authority are allocated within a society. Both sex and gender have frequently, but incorrectly, been portrayed as constant and a binary (i.e., male/female, man/woman). Authors should keep in mind that, in actuality, these are constructs that exist on a spectrum and include other sex categorizations and gender identities. Hence, authors are encouraged to take an informed and thoughtful approach to sex and gender in archaeological research studies involving a myriad of cultures around the world.
Research on human remains
Where applicable, authors should indicate that they have consulted with descendent communities, from initial research design to the presentation and publication of their results, for research involving human remains (e.g., skeletal materials, teeth, aDNA). It is essential that research and publication permits and ethical approvals were obtained in advance by the authors from each of the relevant authorities at the national, regional, and/or university/museum level. Consultation and/or permissions must be addressed in (1) the cover letter that accompanies the submission and (2) the Methods section of the text. The Editors and/or reviewers might also request that authors upload documentation of consultation and/or permissions as Supplementary Online Materials for transparency.
Research involving recent human remains
In cases of experiments involving recent human remains, it is essential that permissions and ethical approval have been obtained from all of the relevant authorities at national, hospital, and university level and from next of kin. Such permissions must be addressed in (1) the cover letter with the submission and (2) the Methods section of the text. The Editors and/or reviewers might also request that authors upload documentation of the permissions as Supplementary Online Materials for transparency.
Photographs of human remains
The journal does allow photographs of human remains; however, authors are strongly encouraged to consider whether such photographs are essential to the presentation of their research, especially in the main manuscript text. If not crucial, out of respect for descendent communities, the photographs should be replaced with drawings or digital scans, or they can be included in the Supplementary Online Materials. If photographs of specific features are required (e.g., skeletal lesions in a paleopathology research paper), it is recommended that the photographs focus on only those areas. Authors may wish to consult the Editors in advance regarding these issues.
Respect for and consultation with descendent groups
Consultation with Indigenous communities and descendent groups may also be legally required and/or professional best-practice for researching involving sites or objects of high significance. Where applicable, authors should indicate that they have consulted with stakeholders regarding the research and the public presentation of their results.
Human subjects research
Studies involving living human subjects is often regulated by institutional bodies (i.e., Intuitional Review Boards) or other organizations, depending on where the research is conducted. Authors are responsible to be familiar with and comply with all appropriate regulations involving human subjects. Please note that some research in experimental archaeology (e.g., human trials of atlatl/spearthrower conditions) or ethnoarchaeology (e.g., working with traditional craftspeople to learn their techniques) may require such approvals, and in these cases, authors should err on the side of caution.
Provenance and disposition of materials
Authors are responsible for providing details about the provenance of studied materials. Studies based on archaeological materials with unknown or dubious provenance might not be accepted for publication in the journal. Studied materials should be curated in a way that would allow reproducibility of the research. Ideally, authors will document the institutional repositories of studied materials in either the Methods and Materials section or the Acknowledgments, and figures will include any relevant field or museum numbers for artifacts documented in those images. Authors must fully abide by relevant national, international, and institutional regulations and protocols involving the studied materials. The journal will not publish materials suspected to have been collected and/or exported from their countries of origin without observance of such regulations and protocols. In addition, the journal will not publish studies on materials held in private collections. In any unclear case, the Editors may request additional information, support, or evidence.
Reporting ages and dates
Ages can be reported in a or yr (i.e., years ago), ka (i.e., thousands of years ago), or Ma (i.e., millions of years ago), but this is not a strict requirement. Calendar dates should be expressed as using either CE (“Common Era”; previously AD or “Anno Domini”) or BCE (“Before Common Era”; previously BC for “Before Christ”). Radiocarbon ages should be fully documented and explained in the main text and/or Supplementary Online Materials (e.g., laboratory number, uncertainty, dated material, pre-treatment method, calibration curve). Calibrated ages or dates should be reported with "cal yr BP" or similar indicators. Other techniques (e.g., U/Th, K/Ar, OSL, cosmogenic isotopies) should include similarly detailed information (e.g., uncertainty level, analytical and data treatment protocols, calculation parameters, corrections). Age models (e.g., Bayesian approaches) should include the relevant details (e.g., software, probability distributions) and, ideally, the relevant code in the Supplementary Online Materials.
​
Author contributions
We require authors to submit an author statement that outlines the individual contributions to the paper using the relevant CRediT roles: Conceptualization; Data curation; Formal analysis; Funding acquisition; Investigation; Methodology; Project administration; Resources; Software; Supervision; Validation; Visualization; Roles/Writing - original draft; Writing - review & editing. Authorship statements should be formatted with the names of authors first and CRediT role(s) following. Additional details and a worked example can be found here.
Changes to authorship (including order)​
Authors are expected to consider carefully the list and ordering of all authors before submitting their manuscript and to provide the definitive list of authors at the time of the submission. Any addition, deletion, or rearrangement of author names in the authorship list must be made only before the manuscript has been accepted and only if approved by the journal Editors. To request such a change, the Editors must receive the completed official form with a resubmission. If this is not received, the Ethics Office screening may reject the resubmission. Only in exceptional circumstances will the Editors consider author changes after the manuscript has been accepted, and publication will be suspended while such a request is under consideration. If a manuscript has already been published in an online issue, any change requests approved by the Editors will result in a corrigendum, except for those instances the reflect our name change policy below.
Name change policy
Elsevier supports ‘invisible’ author name changes for transgender authors and other authors with a strong need for privacy, in accordance with the principles informing the COPE working group. On request from the author, author names can be directly updated on published papers on Elsevier’s primary publishing platforms, without any correction or other note. Arrangements are then made to update the article metadata in secondary indexation databases.
There may be some authors who have less need for privacy (e.g., as a result of marriage, divorce, or religious conversion), and the name change could impact the visibility of their paper. The name can then be changed directly in the article, but a correction/note might be published after discussion with the author.
To arrange a name update, please provide the current name details and list of published journal articles to: namechange@elsevier.com.
Article transfer service
This journal uses the Elsevier Article Transfer Service to find the best home for your manuscript. This means that if an Editor believes that your manuscript is more suitable for an alternative journal, you might be asked to consider transferring the manuscript to such a journal. If you agree, your manuscript will be transferred, although you will have the opportunity to make changes to the manuscript before the submission is complete. Please note that your manuscript will be independently reviewed by the new journal. More information can be found here.
Copyright
Upon acceptance of an article, authors will be asked to complete a 'Journal Publishing Agreement' form (see more information on this). An email will be sent to the corresponding author confirming receipt of the manuscript together with a link to the 'Journal Publishing Agreement' form. Permitted third party reuse of open access articles is determined by the author's choice of user license.
​
Author rights
As an author you (or your employer or institution) have certain rights to reuse your work. Find out more
Elsevier supports responsible sharing
Find out how you can share your research published in Elsevier journals.
Role of the funding source
All authors are requested to identify who provided financial support for the conduct of the research and/or preparation of the article and to briefly describe the role of the sponsor(s), if any, in study design; in the collection, analysis and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; and in the decision to submit the article for publication. If the funding source(s) had no such involvement, it is recommended to state this.
Elsevier Researcher Academy
Researcher Academy is a free e-learning platform designed to support early and mid-career researchers throughout their research journey. The "Learn" environment at Researcher Academy offers several interactive modules, webinars, downloadable guides and resources to guide you through the process of writing for research and going through peer review. Feel free to use these free resources to improve your submission and navigate the publication process with ease.
Language (usage and editing services)
It is the sole responsibility of authors to ensure that their manuscript is in good, understandable English (American or British spelling is accepted but not a mixture of both). This is not the responsibility of reviewers or editors. When the English used in a manuscript is difficult to understand, it can result in significant reviewing delays or even rejection on that basis. The journal leadership recognizes that there is no such thing as “perfect English” (even English speakers from the United States, England, Canada, and Australia will sometimes use different grammar), but clarity is essential. Authors who feel their manuscript may require editing to eliminate possible grammatical or spelling errors and to conform to correct scientific English may wish to use the English Language Editing service available from Elsevier's Author Services. Authors might also find that their home institutions offer or support English language editing services.
Submission
Our online submission system guides you stepwise through the process of entering your article details and uploading your files. The system converts your article files to a single PDF file used in the peer-review process. Editable files (e.g., Word, LaTeX) are required to typeset your article for final publication. All correspondence, including notification of the Editor's decision and requests for revision, is sent by e-mail.
Suggested reviewers
We no longer ask authors to provide the names of five suggested reviewers due to the ethical issues involved.
Opposed reviewers
Authors are allowed to provide a short list of individuals who, for various reasons (e.g., personal conflicts, professional competition, harassment cases), would not be objective reviewers of the research and manuscript. Authors have an opportunity to list the reason but, given that some reasons may be deeply personal and private, are not required to do so. The Editors will respect this list with no questions asked.
AUTHOR INFO: PREPARATION
Some, but not all, of these policies can be found on Elsevier's website.
​
New submissions
Submission to this journal proceeds totally online, and authors will be guided stepwise through the creation and uploading of files. The system automatically converts files to a single PDF file, which is used in the peer-review process.
All submissions should have (1) both page and line numbers, (2) a standard font and font size of at least 10 pt, (3) one-and-a-half or double line spacing, (4) text in a single column (i.e., do not try to replicate the final formatting for an article in the journal with two columns), and (5) sections as listed below. Footnotes should generally be avoided.
As part of the “Your Paper Your Way” service, authors may choose to submit their manuscript as a single file to be used in the peer-review process. This can be a PDF file or a Word document. It should have a format or layout that can be used by the Editors and any reviewers to evaluate the submission easily and transparently. It should contain figures of sufficient quality for reviewing. Place the figures and tables near the relevant text in the manuscript, rather than at the bottom or top of the file. The corresponding captions should be placed directly below the figure or above the table.
Authors are encouraged to still provide all or some of their high-resolution figure source files at initial submission. Note that, especially when conducting fieldwork, reviewers do not always have access to broadband speeds, so before authors are encouraged to keep the final file size reasonably small during the initial submission. The submission system endeavors to create low-resolution images for the PDF it builds and keep high-resolution files online for reviewers to download separately.
References
This journal uses in-text citations (Harvard-style: author, date; e.g., “Smith, 1990”), not a numbered reference list. There are no strict requirements on reference formatting in the Bibliography during submission as long as the style is consistent among the entries. Use of DOI is highly encouraged to aid with proper formatting of references for accepted articles. Authors are also encouraged to utilize citation-manager software and apply the Elsevier (Harvard) reference formatting automatically. Missing or uncited references will be highlighted at proofing stage for authors to correct.
Formatting requirements
All manuscripts must contain the essential elements needed to convey the research results, typically: Abstract, Keywords, Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, Interpretation, Discussion, and Conclusions with Figures, Tables, and their captions.
If an article includes Supplementary Online Materials (e.g., spreadsheets, code, PDFs, digital models, videos), they should be included during the submission for peer-review purposes.
Articles should have clearly defined, numbered sections and subsections, following the standard formatting found in the journal’s previously published articles.
Peer review
This journal operates a single-blind review process. Peer reviewers remain anonymous to the authors unless a reviewer waives anonymity and signs their comments.
All submissions are initially assessed by the Editors for suitable publishing scope and quality for the journal. Manuscripts deemed suitable are typically sent to a minimum of two independent expert reviewers to evaluate their scientific and archaeological quality. Submissions not initially assessed as suitable by the Editors are usually desk-rejected or transferred. The Editors-in-Chief are responsible for all of the final decisions regarding acceptance, revision, or rejection of submissions.
Editors are not involved in decisions about submissions (1) which they have written themselves (2) which have been written by family members, students, or colleagues, or (3) which relate to products or services in which the Editor has an interest. Any such submission is subject to all of the journal's normal, established procedures, with peer review and publishing decisions handled independently by the other Editor.
Peer Review Description
The following summary describes the peer review process for this journal:
Identity transparency: Single anonymized/single blind
Reviewer interacts with: Editors only
Review information published: None
Post-publication commenting: None
By using standard terms, we aim to help make the peer-review process for articles and journals more transparent and to enable the community to better assess and compare peer review practices between different journals. More information is available here.
Article structure and content
Authors must paginate their manuscript and provide line numbering throughout the text to facilitate peer review and editing comments.
Subdivision: sections and subsections
Authors should divide their manuscript into clearly named and numbered sections and subsections. Sections (the first level) should be numbered (e.g., 1, 2, 3). Second-level subsections should be numbered with one decimal place (e.g., 1.1, 1.2, 1.3), and third-level subsections should be numbered with two decimal places (e.g., 1.1.1, 1.1.2). The Abstract is not included in section numbering (i.e., numbered sections should start with “1. Introduction”). Use the section numbering for internal cross-referencing (i.e., do not refer to “the text” or “above/below”). Avoid more than three levels of section headings.
Title
The title should be concise, informative, and encapsulate the core message or finding of the paper. For a regionally based article, the title should mention the geographic area, cultural context, and/or country concerned. For example, instead of “Mechanical testing of cooking vessels from Chengziya,” a title closer to “Mechanical testing of cooking vessels from Chengziya (Longshan culture, Shandong Province, China)” is preferable.
Keywords
Three to seven keywords are used to make the paper more visible during web searches. They should highlight core aspects of the paper but should not repeat terms in the title. Single- or two-word keywords are preferable to long phrases.
Highlights
Highlights are brief, bullet-point summaries of the main findings. There can be up to five highlight points, each no longer than 85 characters including spaces. Note that highlights will only appear in the online version of an article.
Abstract
The Abstract should summarise the entire article, including background, aims, methods, key results, and significance of results. It should mention both the area and time period involved in the research. It should not contain literature citations it is unless absolutely essential. Abstract length should be between 150 and 250 words.
Graphical abstract (optional)
A graphical abstract summarises the article visually. The imagery should be clear as well as understandable to broad audience. Not all research is amenable to graphical abstracts so they are optional. Note that it will only appear in the online version of an article.
Introduction
State the aims and objectives of the research and provide an adequate background for the research question being addressed. Relevant literature should be addressed, but a detailed literature survey is usually better suited to a dedicated Background section. By the end of the Introduction, ordinarily in the last paragraph, readers should be provided a brief summary of the results and their broad archaeological significance.
Theory
If desired, a Theory section can extend the theoretical background that is broached in the Introduction and lay the foundation for the Interpretation and Discussion sections.
Context
It is important that the fundamental aspects of the place and time under investigation (e.g., regional geology, geography, biogeography/ecology, archaeological sequence, history) are clear and supported by the literature and/or maps, as appropriate. This is especially important because these details may not be known to international readers. Insufficient contextualization (e.g., archaeological, historical, chronological, geographic) of a study is one of reviewers’ most common critiques.
Materials and Methods
This section and any subsections should provide sufficient details to allow the research to be reproduced by an independent researcher. Methods that are already published should be summarized and indicated by a bibliographic reference. When quoting directly from a published method, authors must use quotation marks (or a block quotation) and also cite the source. Any modifications to existing methods should also be described. An extended Materials and Methods section can be included in the Supplementary Online Materials.
Results
Results should be clear, objective, and document all findings using written descriptions, summary statistics and statistical tests, tables, and figures, where appropriate. Data are often best summarized in tables and figures instead of narrative discussions. Voluminous results (e.g., data for thousands of artifacts, DNA sequences) should be presented in full in the Supplementary Online Materials and/or in an institutional repository with a citation to the entire dataset and a summary in the Results section. Findings should be presented with objectivity in this section, not yet interpreted through the lens of the study at hand.
Interpretation
This section provides an interpretation of the results, typically considered in light of the relevant literature, theoretical framework, and research question previously introduced.
Discussion
This section should explore the significance of the findings, first considering the specific archaeological context and then addressing issues, topics, or debates of broader interest and significance to an international audience. Future directions might also be discussed.
Conclusions
Manuscripts should end with a Conclusions section that summarizes the key outcome(s).
Appendices and/or Supplementary Online Materials
Multiple appendices or supplementary files should be identified as A, B, etc. Tables and figures should be given separate numbering: Table A.1; Fig. A.1, etc.
Essential information on the first page
Title. The title should be concise, informative, and encapsulate the core message or finding. For a regionally based article, it should mention the geographic area, cultural context, and/or country concerned.
Author names and affiliations. Check that all names are accurately spelled. During the proofing stage, authors will be asked to confirm that the given name(s) and family name(s) of each author have been correctly identified. Authors may include their name in another script within parentheses behind the English transliteration. Present the authors' affiliation addresses (where their work was done) below the names. Indicate all affiliations with a lowercase superscript letter immediately after the author's name and in front of the appropriate address. Please list no more than three affiliations per author; this is not a place to list courtesy affiliations, adjunct appointments, etc. A complete affiliation includes the institution, department or unit, city, state or province, and country. Mailing addresses are no longer required or requested. Provide the e-mail address(es) for each author and, if available, their 16-digit ORCIDs.
Corresponding author. Clearly indicate who will handle correspondence at all stages of submission, peer review, and publication. This responsibility includes answering any future queries about the research. Ensure that a stable e-mail address is listed here. If available, more than one email address can be listed to facilitate future correspondence.
Present/permanent address. If an author has moved since the work described in the article was done, or was visiting at the time, a 'Present address' or 'Permanent address' may be indicated as a footnote to that author's name. The address at which the author actually did the work must be retained as the main, affiliation. Superscript Arabic numerals are used for such footnotes.
Highlights
Highlights are mandatory (after revision) as increase the discoverability of articles via search engines. They consist of a short collection of bullet points that capture the novel results and methods of the research. Highlights must be submitted in a separate editable file in the online submission system when uploading a revised manuscript. Please use 'Highlights' in the file name and include a series of 3 to 5 bullet points (each with a maximum of 85 characters including spaces).
Abstract
A concise, factual abstract is required. In only 150 to 250 words, the abstract should state the purpose of the research, the principal results, and the major conclusions. An abstract is often presented separately from the article, so it must be able to stand alone. For this reason, References should be avoided, but if essential, then cite the author(s) and year(s). In addition, non-standard or uncommon abbreviations should be avoided, but if essential they must be defined at their first mention in the abstract itself.
Graphical abstract
A graphical abstract is optional but can draw more attention to the online version of the article. It summarize the contents of the article in a concise, pictorial form designed to capture the attention of a wide readership. Graphical abstracts should be submitted as a separate file in the online submission system. Image size: minimum size of 531 × 1328 pixels or larger with the same proportions. The image should be readable at a size of 5 × 13 cm with a regular screen resolution. Preferred file types: TIFF, EPS, PDF, or MS Office files. Examples can be found here: example Graphical Abstracts.
Keywords
Provide 3-7 keywords, placed immediately after the Abstract, using British spelling. Do not repeat terms already in the title. Avoid common or generic words, plural terms, and multiple concepts (e.g., do not use “The metals of Bronze Age Europe”). Be very sparing with abbreviations. Only abbreviations firmly established and easily recognizable in the field are usually eligible (e.g., GPR). These keywords will be used for indexing purposes.
Abbreviations and Acronyms
Be very sparing of abbreviations and acronyms not in widespread usage. Abbreviations and acronyms, even those seemingly standard in the field should be defined with their first occurrence in the text. Alternatively, a footnote may be placed on the first page of the article. Abbreviations and acronyms that are unavoidable in the Abstract must also be defined at their first mention there. Ensure consistency of use throughout the article.
Taxonomy
Linnean binomials should be used to identify all but the most common domestic animals. The species name or abbreviation should follow all Latin binomials at first mention. Taxonomic usage should, in general, follow the standards set out in the international codes for zoological and botanical nomenclature. Generic and specific names of animals and plants should be italicized, while the names of higher taxa should not be italicized. Generic names may be abbreviated following their first mention in the main text of a paper, but not where there is the potential for confusion, for instance two or more genera with the same initial letter.
Acknowledgments
Acknowledgments should be listed in separate section at the end of the main text before the References. List here those individuals who provided help during the research (e.g., providing language help, writing assistance or proofreading the article, etc.) but did not meet the criteria for authorship or declined inclusion as an author. Sources of funding or other research support should also be documented in the Acknowledgments. Authors are encouraged to recognize that peer reviewers play an important role in the publishing of their research and, therefore, should consider acknowledging their contributions as well.
Formatting of funding sources
List funding sources in this standard way to facilitate compliance to funder's requirements. For example: This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health [grant numbers xxxx, yyyy]; the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Seattle, WA [grant number zzzz]; and the United States Institutes of Peace [grant number aaaa]. It is not necessary to include detailed descriptions on the program or type of grants and awards. When funding is from a block grant or other resources available to a university, college, or other research institution, submit the name of the institute or organization that provided the funding. If no funding has been provided for the research, it is recommended to include the following sentence: This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Units
Follow internationally accepted rules and conventions. Use the International System of Units (SI), and include a space between values and units: e.g., 0.1 µm, 1.0 km, 2.0 mg, 3.0° C, 4.0 ml. If other units are mentioned, please also give their SI equivalent, when applicable. Some common units (e.g., parts per million or ppm) are not technically SI notation (e.g., 1 ppm = 1 mg/Kg) but nevertheless may be used.
Footnotes
Footnotes should be used very sparingly. Number them consecutively throughout the article. Many word processors build footnotes into the text, and this feature should be used. Should this option not be available, indicate the position of footnotes in the text and present the footnotes themselves separately at the end of the article.
Revised submissions
Regardless of the file format of the original submission, when submitting a revision, the author must provide with an editable file of the entire article. Keep the layout of the text as simple as possible. Most formatting codes will be removed and replaced on processing the manuscript.
Artwork – General points
• Use a uniform font style and size in the original artwork files.
• Simple, common fonts are preferred: e.g., Arial or Helvetica for sans serif text, Times New Roman or Times for serif text. Other very similar fonts, especially those optimized for screen reading (e.g. Calibri, Cambria, Aptops), are also acceptable.
• Number the illustrations according to their sequence in the text.
• Use a logical naming convention for artwork files. Ideally they should be named: Fig. 1, Fig. 2, Fig. 3 etc.
Artwork – Formats
Regardless of the application used, when artwork is finalized, please 'save as' or convert the images to one of the following formats (note the resolution requirements for line drawings, halftones, and line/halftone combinations given below):
EPS (or PDF): Vector drawings. Embed the font or save the text as 'graphics'.
TIFF (or JPG): Color or grayscale photographs (halftones): always use a minimum of 300 dpi.
TIFF (or JPG): Bitmapped line drawings: use a minimum of 1000 dpi.
TIFF (or JPG): Combinations bitmapped line/half-tone (color or grayscale): a minimum of 500 dpi.
Artwork – Color
Given that Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports is produced and pubishes digitally online, all figures can appear in both color online (e.g., ScienceDirect and other sites) and the final PDF file. Authors are encouraged to use color in their figures in a way that aids in their interpretation. Authors are also encouraged to consult with online resources for color schemes that are favourable for readers with varied forms of color blindness.
Figures
All visual content (e.g., illustrations, maps, photographs, diagrams, graphs) are termed “figures.” Please ensure that figures are numbered consecutively according to the order of their appearance in the text. Ensure that each figure has a text caption (not on the figure itself) with a brief title and description. Keep text in the figures themselves to a minimum. Explain all symbols and abbreviations either in the caption or in a key on the figure. Please ensure that all maps have a North arrow and scale. As a general rule, no lettering on a figure should be smaller than 1 mm high for lower case and 2 mm high for upper case on an A4-sized journal page. Figure captions should include notation that, when relevant, a copyright holder has granted permission for use (e.g., Image courtesy of Chris Hunt; Illustration by Chris Hunt and used with permission; Photograph courtesy of the National History Museum and shared with Creative Commons License BY-SA 4.0).
Tables
Please submit tables as editable text files, not images. For initial submission, tables can be placed next to the relevant text in the manuscript or on separate page(s) at the end. Number tables consecutively in accordance with their appearance in the text and place any table notes below the table body. Data presented in tables should not be duplicated in detail elsewhere in the manuscript (e.g., listed point-by-point in the Results section). Do not use vertical lines or shading in table cells. After acceptance and during proofing, tables will be adjusted to fit the journal’s standard style. Authors are encouraged to see how tables similar to theirs have been previously published in the journal. Submitting a table that is formatted close to the journal style makes the proofing stage much easier.
References
Reference links
Increased discoverability of research and high-quality peer review are ensured by online links to the sources cited. To create links to abstracting and indexing services, please check that data for the references are correct. Incorrect surnames, journal/book titles, publication year, etc. could prevent link creation. When copying references from other papers, please be careful as they may already contain errors.
Use of DOIs is highly encouraged. A DOI serves as a permanent link to any electronic article or other resource. Use of citation manager software is also strongly encouraged.
Web references
As a minimum, the full URL should be given and the date when the reference was last accessed. Any further information, if known (DOI, author names, dates, reference to a source publication, etc.), should also be given. Web references can be listed separately (e.g., after the reference list) under a different heading, if desired, or can be included in the reference list.
Data references
This journal encourages authors to cite underlying or other relevant datasets in their manuscript by citing them in the text and including a data reference in the reference list. Data references should include the following elements: author name(s), dataset title, data repository, version (where available), year, and global persistent identifier. Add [dataset] immediately before the reference so we can properly identify it as a data reference. The [dataset] identifier will not appear in the published article.
Preprint references
Where a preprint has subsequently become available as a peer-reviewed publication, the formal publication should be used as the reference. If there are preprints that are central to the manuscript or that cover crucial developments involving the topic, but are not yet formally published, these may be referenced.
Preprints should be clearly marked as such, for example by including the word preprint, or the name of the preprint server, as part of the reference. The preprint DOI should also be provided.
References in a special issue
Please ensure that the words 'this issue' are added to any references in the list (and any citations in the text) to other articles in the same Special Issue.
Reference management software
Most Elsevier journals have their reference template available in many of the most popular reference management software products. These include all products that support Citation Style Language styles, such as Mendeley. Using citation plug-ins from these products, authors only need to select the appropriate journal template when preparing their article, after which citations and bibliographies will be automatically formatted in the journal's style. If no template is yet available for this journal, please follow the format of the sample references and citations as shown in this Guide. If you use reference management software, please ensure that you remove all field codes before submitting the electronic manuscript. More information on how to remove field codes from different reference management software.
Reference formatting
Authors are strongly encouraged from the start to use DOIs, reference software, and the standard Elsevier citation style used by their journals.
Video and animations
The journal accepts video material and animation sequences to support and enhance scientific research. Authors who have video or animation files that they wish to submit with their article are strongly encouraged to include links to these within the body of the article. This can be done in the same way as a figure or table by referring to the video or animation content and noting in the body text where it should be placed. All submitted files should be properly labelled so that they directly relate to the video file's content. Note that the submission system may limit video and animated file sizes. Any video and animation files supplied will be published online in the electronic version of your article in Elsevier Web products, including ScienceDirect.
Please supply 'stills' with your files: you can choose any frame from the video or animation or make a separate image. These will be used instead of standard icons and will personalize the link to your video data. For more detailed instructions please visit our video instruction pages.
Supplementary Online Materials
Supplementary Online Materials (e.g., additional figures, code, applications, sound clips) can be published with an article to enhance it. Submitted items are published exactly as they are received (Excel or PowerPoint files will appear as such online). Please submit your material together with the article and supply a concise, descriptive caption for each supplementary file. If you wish to make changes to supplementary material during any stage of the process, please make sure to provide an updated file. Do not annotate any corrections on a previous version. Please switch off the 'Track Changes' option in Microsoft Office files as these will appear in the published version.
Research data
This journal requires you to share data that supports your research publication where appropriate and enables you to interlink the data with your published articles. Research data refers to the results of observations or experimentation that validate research findings. To facilitate reproducibility and data reuse, this journal also encourages you to share your software, code, models, algorithms, protocols, methods, and other materials related to the project.
Below are a number of ways in which you can associate data with your article or make a statement about the availability of your data when submitting your manuscript. When sharing data in one of these ways, you are expected to cite the data in your manuscript and reference list. Please refer to the References section for more information about data citation. For more information on depositing, sharing and using research data and other relevant research materials, visit the research data page.
Data linking
If you have made your research data available in a data repository, you can link your article directly to the dataset. Elsevier collaborates with a number of repositories to link articles on ScienceDirect with relevant repositories, giving readers access to underlying data that gives them a better understanding of the research described.
There are different ways to link your datasets to your article. When available, you can directly link your dataset to your article by providing the relevant information in the submission system. For more information, visit the database linking page.
For supported data repositories a repository banner will automatically appear next to your published article on ScienceDirect.
In addition, you can link to relevant data or entities through identifiers within the text of your manuscript, using the following format: Database: xxxx (e.g., TAIR: AT1G01020; CCDC: 734053; PDB: 1XFN).
Research Elements
This journal allows you to publish research objects related to your original research – such as data, methods, protocols, software and hardware – as an additional paper in Research Elements. Research Elements is a suite of peer-reviewed, open access journals that make research objects findable, accessible, and reusable. Articles place research objects into context by providing detailed descriptions of objects and their applications and by linking to the associated original research articles. Research Elements articles can be prepared by you, or by one of your collaborators. During submission, you will be alerted to the opportunity to prepare and submit a Research Elements article.
Data statement
To foster transparency, the journal requires authors to state the availability of the data in their submission. This may also be a requirement of funding bodies or institutions. A data availability statement is provided during the submission process. The statement will appear with the published article.
AUTHOR INFO: AFTER ACCEPTANCE
After acceptance, your submission leaves the submission system to which the editors have access and enter other phases of production, as described here based on the Elsevier official website:
​
Online proof correction
To ensure a fast publication process of the article, we kindly ask authors to provide us with their proof corrections within two days. Corresponding authors will receive an e-mail with a link to our online proofing system, allowing annotation and correction of proofs online. The environment is similar to MS Word: in addition to editing text, you can also comment on figures/tables and answer questions from the Copy Editor. Web-based proofing provides a faster and less error-prone process by allowing you to directly type your corrections, eliminating the potential introduction of errors. If preferred, you can still choose to annotate and upload your edits on the PDF version. All instructions for proofing will be given in the e-mail we send to authors, including alternative methods to the online version and PDF. We will do everything possible to get your article published quickly and accurately. Please use this proof only for checking the typesetting, editing, completeness and correctness of the text, tables and figures. Significant changes to the article as accepted for publication will only be considered at this stage with permission from the Editor. It is important to ensure that all corrections are sent back to us in one communication. Please check carefully before replying, as inclusion of any subsequent corrections cannot be guaranteed. Proofreading is solely authors’ responsibility.
Offprints
The corresponding author will, at no cost, receive a customized Share Link providing 50 days free access to the final published version of the article on ScienceDirect. The Share Link can be used for sharing the article via any communication channel, including email and social media. For an extra charge, paper offprints can be ordered via the offprint order form which is sent once the article is accepted for publication. Corresponding and co-authors may order offprints at any time via Elsevier's Author Services. Corresponding authors who have published their article gold open access do not receive a Share Link as their final published version of the article is available open access on ScienceDirect and can be shared through the article DOI link.
OTHER POLICIES & FAQs
Additional Elsevier polices can be found here.
​
What is the most frequently missed Instruction to Authors?
Not including page and/or line numbers is, by far, the most common reason that a submission is sent back to authors during the technical checks. Line numbers make it much easier for reviewers to refer to a specific part of the text.
​
What is the most common reason for a submission to be rejected?
Submissions outside the journal's scope are usually desk-rejected without review. We receive all sources of submissions related to cultural heritage preservation practices, object conservation studies, and similar topics, and some of them are very well done. We do not, however, publish submissions on those topics, so we must reject them.