Join Our Mailing List

  • Facebook Social Icon
  • Twitter Social Icon
  • Google+ Social Icon
  • YouTube Social  Icon

© 2019 Scientific Coalition for UAP Studies - Proudly created with Wix.com

Prospective Authors Guide

First Become an Affiliate by Clicking HERE.

Outline of SCU White Paper

Submission and Peer Review Process

A designated Peer Review Coordinator (PRC) will receive the White Paper submission and be responsible for coordination of the peer review process:


 An Initial Determination of whether a submission is worth consideration is a decision to be coordinated between the PRC and two SCU Board members or more if necessary. More SCU Board members may be necessary if no common agreement can be reached on worthiness.


 If the PRC and two or more board members indicate ‘no’ then the reasons for immediate rejection will be articulated in an email and sent to the submitter. Notify Submitter: Unsuitable for Review.


 If yes, then the PRC will notify the submitter and query all Affiliates to request volunteer reviews with consideration to the following information:

 

 If there are not at least two Affiliates with the background appropriate for the technical level of the White Paper then:


 The PRC will notify the submitter that there will be an attempt to outsource the Peer Review to (one or more) Universities. Consequently, the submitter will be asked to sign a release of information allowing for University
review.

 The PRC will then contact, perhaps through Affiliates, Universities to request a review of the White paper. The PRC may also query Affiliates to support the effort to get someone they trust and sufficiently credentialed to conduct the review.

 

 If no Peer Reviewer can be found, Notify Submitter: Unable to Peer Review. The PRC will notify the submitter there cannot be a review of the White Paper at this time.
     

For questions regarding paper submission please contact SCU's PRC at kingsbury.scu@gmail.com or use the form below.

Scientific Papers

 

White Papers.jpg
SCU Word Manuscript Template.jpg

 If Peer Review is possible then the PRC will Notify Submitter: Under Peer Review. The PRC should include any additional information as needed or appropriate for this phase, such as the possibility that the submitter provide any needed corrections or clarifications. In addition, the PRC will notify the submitter about the date when they can expect to receive the reviews.

 Once the Peer Review is completed, the result will be either: 1) Accepted as is; 2) Accepted pending minor revisions; 3) Accepted pending major revisions; 4) Revise and resubmit; and, 5) Rejected. All reviewers will be asked to make a final determination that falls into one of the above categories. If an outcome is unclear, then the
overall decision of the paper will be determined by the PRC in consultation with two SCU Board members.

 If Accepted, then the PRC will inform the submitter whether any additional revisions are required. If so, the PRC will pass on the comments and critiques of the reviewers. Once the paper has been adequately revised, then the PRC will Notify Submitter: Accepted and Published. The PRC will coordinate placement on the website and notify the submitter of the status and location of the SCU White Paper.

 A Revise and Resubmit decision will occur when the paper is deemed to have considerable promise but requires significant revisions. Notify Submitter: Revise and Resubmit wherein the submitter will be encouraged to undertake these revisions and resubmit the paper for another round of reviews.

 If Rejected, Notify Submitter: Rejected. The PRC will compile the reasons why and contact the submitter
with the result.

 The PRC should coordinate with the SCU Board any issues that may arise during any phase of the peer review process that create procedural problems not covered in the Peer Review Procedures. The PRC may be requested to submit, in writing to the SCU Board, any procedural changes and why these changes should be implemented.