About the Journal

Focus and Scope

This open access journal aims to publish preliminary to larger studies or early-stage (both empirical and experimental) research in the fields of life science and humanities. This allows researchers to share their initial results and hypotheses with the academic community, fostering collaboration and further research. A related focus of the journal is the publications of articles presenting negative results. Negative results, where the hypothesis is not confirmed, are crucial for a comprehensive understanding of a research topic. Statistic suggests that a significant proportion of negative results may remain unpublished. By publishing these results, the journal can help prevent unnecessary duplication of research and provide a more balanced view of the evidence. This can contribute to a more robust and reliable scientific literature in life sciences and humanities. Given its broad focus, the journal aims to foster interdisciplinary dialogue and collaboration, promoting research that bridges these two fields.

Peer Review Process

All manuscripts submitted to the journal undergo a rigorous peer-review procedure aimed at guaranteeing scientific quality, originality, methodological rigour and ethical publication standards.

1. Initial editorial screening
Every submission is first evaluated by a member of the Editorial Board. During this first check, the editor assesses whether the manuscript:

•         Fits within the journal’s aims & scope,


•         Respects the ethical standards and formatting guidelines,


•         Presents sufficient scientific relevance and clarity to merit full external review.

Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements may be returned without external review.

2. External peer review (single-blind)
Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are sent to at least one, and typically two, independent peer reviewers with competence in the relevant field. The review process is single-blind: reviewers know the identity of the authors, but authors do not know the identity of reviewers.

•         If reviewers’ opinions diverge substantially, or in case of doubt, the editor may appoint a third independent reviewer to provide an additional evaluation.


•         Reviewers are selected to avoid conflicts of interest and must declare any potential conflict prior to accepting the review assignment.

3. Review criteria
Reviewers are invited to evaluate the manuscript according to the following criteria (among others):

•         Originality and theoretical or empirical contribution;


•         Methodological soundness and clarity;


•         Correctness and clarity in results and interpretation;


•         Adequacy of references and literature context;


•         Quality of writing, structure and overall presentation;


•         Ethical compliance (e.g., use of data, informed consent if applicable, transparency, etc.).

4. Editorial decision
On the basis of the reviewers’ evaluations and recommendations, and after possible discussion within the Editorial Board, the editor appointing the review makes one of the following decisions:

•         Accept for publication,


•         Accept pending minor revisions,


•         Eequest major revision and resubmission,


•         reject.

5. Revision and resubmission
 In case of requested revisions, authors receive anonymized reviewer comments and are required to prepare a revised version, addressing all remarks. Revised manuscripts may be re-sent to the original reviewers (or to new reviewers, if needed) for further evaluation.

6. Ethics, transparency and conflict of interest
The journal adheres to high ethical standards in the review and publication process. All participants (editors, reviewers, authors) must declare any potential conflicts of interest. The identity of reviewers remains confidential with respect to the authors, but a transparent policy on conflicts and editorial decisions is in place.

We believe that this procedure ensures fair, unbiased and rigorous evaluation of every submission, maintaining the scholarly integrity of the journal and providing authors with constructive, expert feedback.

Publication Frequency

The journal ordinarily publishes two volumes per year.

Open Access Policy

Publication frequency

The journal ordinarily publishes two volumes per year.

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal is an essential model for PRNR.
It is necessary to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer and the publisher.

Publication ethics: PRNR aheres to the indication of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). 

Human Studies and Subjects: In compliance with ethical policies, for all manuscripts including human subjects, the authors must declare an ethical statement. The authors must declare that the studies adhere to international standards according to the Helsinki Declaration. Anonymization is required with reference to subjects’ details, data and images can only be published with the consent of the involved participants. The signature of the informed consent must be declared in the study methods, so that all authors are required to confirm its reception. The authors must declare the receipt of the signed consent. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.

Animal Studies: Authors are required to specify that their practices were ethically adherent to high standards, approved and compliant to guidelines. Thus, authors must declare their adherence to national or international regulations, suggesting their reference context. This information must be declared in the study methods. Authors must refer to the specific master plan, referring to their provenance and institutional affiliation, as in the case of UE, UK and USA. 

Publication decisions
The editor of the PRNR is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published.
The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Fair play
An editor at any time evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality
The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.

- Duties of Reviewers
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

Promptness
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers. 

Authors participating as involved figures in the Journal must include a statement reporting their role in the official cover letter. All submissions provided by the above-mentioned figures will be assigned to external section editors in order to respect the peer review process.

- Duties of Authors
Reporting standards
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Data Access and Retention
If applicable, authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and Plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of the Paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors must disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. Authors are required to disclose any potential conflict of interest. A conflict of interest can be anything potentially interfering, or potentially perceived as interfering with the objective peer review process, editorial decisions or publication process of contributions submitted to PRNR. We expect all authors to disclose any real or possible conflict(s) of interest to readers that may directly relate to the subject matter of their article. This includes any relationship with companies, manufacturers of devices or other corporations whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article or who have sponsored the study. Any relationship, interest (financial or not) that could be considered as potentially impacting on authors’ objectivity is meant as a possible conflict of interest.

Fundamental errors in published works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Sponsors

• Sherpa Romeo
• SBA | Sistema Bibliotecario di Ateneo

Journal History

PRNR was foundend in 2024 at the University of Messina, Italy, to ...