Author guidelines

Before you prepare your manuscript

Choose a journal whose scope matches the research and select one of its accepted article types. The journal’s About page specifies main-text and abstract limits, figure/table allowances, reference style and discipline-specific reporting. These requirements take precedence over the general guide.

Find a journal and read its requirements →

Choose the correct destination

1. Read the journal’s full aims and scope, not only its title. Identify the subject area, intended readership and the type of contribution your manuscript makes.
2. Check that the journal accepts your manuscript type. A short opinion piece must not be labelled Original Research, and a narrative literature discussion must not be labelled a Systematic Review unless the methods justify that classification.
3. Read the exclusions on the journal’s About page. If a manuscript crosses disciplines, explain why the selected journal is the most appropriate destination.
4. Check whether the material has appeared as a thesis, conference abstract, report or preprint. Disclose this history and cite or link the earlier version where available.
5. Resolve authorship, permissions, ethical documentation and data-sharing arrangements before submission rather than waiting until acceptance.

What counts as a complete manuscript?

A complete package contains an editable main manuscript, a title page, all cited figures and tables, a cover letter, the relevant reporting checklist, supplementary files where used, and the declarations required by the research design. A file called “final paper” without author details, references or ethics statements is not a complete submission.

The journal-specific requirements and this general guide should be read together. Where a general recommendation and a journal’s explicit article-type rule differ, follow the journal’s rule and explain any necessary exception in the cover letter.

Title and title page

Use an informative, specific title that reflects the work without overstating its findings. Avoid unexplained abbreviations, promotional wording and claims of priority that the evidence does not support.

On the title page provide the full title, article type, all author names and affiliations, corresponding author’s email, ORCID identifiers where available, main-text word count and the number of figures and tables. Clearly identify any equal contributions or shared senior authorship.

Constructing a useful title

Name the principal topic, population, setting or approach where these are important to interpretation. A title should allow readers to distinguish the study from other work on the same broad subject. Avoid titles such as “An investigation into education” that do not identify the question being examined.

Illustrative title format: “[Main phenomenon] among [population] in [setting]: a [study design] study.” This is a formatting illustration, not a published Spectrum article. Humanities and theoretical contributions may use a substantive title and explanatory subtitle instead.

Title-page order

1. Full manuscript title and selected article type.
2. Full names of authors in the agreed publication order; do not include degrees or job titles in the author byline.
3. Numbered affiliations identifying department, institution, city and country.
4. Corresponding author’s name and email, with an additional correspondence contact only if necessary.
5. ORCID identifiers, equal-contribution notes and current-address notes where applicable.
6. Main-text word count, abstract word count, number of figures, number of tables and list of supplementary files.

Do not change the author order or add an author during revision without agreement from all affected authors and an explanation to the editor.

Abstract and keywords

Summarise the purpose, approach, main findings and implications. Use the maximum abstract length listed for the selected article type. Research abstracts may use Background, Methods, Results and Conclusion headings; reviews and humanities papers may use a coherent unstructured abstract suited to the discipline.

Do not include citations, unexplained abbreviations or claims absent from the paper. Include applicable trial registration information. Provide 4–6 keywords that accurately describe the topic and methods.

Writing an informative abstract

• Purpose: identify the problem and specific objective. Do not spend most of the abstract describing a broad field.
• Approach: state the design or interpretive method, setting, relevant sample or source material and principal analytic approach.
• Findings: report the main result or argument. For quantitative research, give the key estimates and uncertainty where space allows; do not report only that results were “significant.”
• Meaning: state the conclusion supported by the study and any limitation essential to its interpretation.

For a systematic review, describe the information sources, selection criteria, number or nature of included studies and main synthesis findings. For theoretical or humanities work, identify the central problem, approach, principal argument and scholarly contribution.

Avoid promises such as “results will be discussed,” references to a figure the reader cannot see, and conclusions stronger than those in the manuscript. All numbers in the abstract must agree with the main text and tables.

Selecting keywords

Choose 4–6 searchable terms that cover the subject, population, method or context. Prefer recognised disciplinary terms to broad words such as “research,” “study” or “analysis.” Spell out a term where an acronym would be ambiguous.

Manuscript length and sections

Main-text word limits include footnotes and exclude the title page, abstract, reference list, figure legends, table contents, declarations and supplementary files. State the count on the title page.

Empirical papers normally contain Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion and Conclusion. Reviews, theoretical work and humanities papers may use discipline-appropriate headings. Number pages and lines. Explain abbreviations at first use and use SI units where applicable.

Article-type limits at a glance

Not every journal accepts every type in this table. Check the selected journal’s About page. Authors must not move core argument or essential results into supplementary material solely to evade a word limit.

What each main section should do

• Introduction: establish the problem, locate the research gap and end with the question, objective or argument. Distinguish the study’s contribution from existing work.
• Methods or approach: explain how evidence was collected, selected and analysed. Include enough information to assess the work and its limitations.
• Results or analysis: present findings in a logical order. Explain tables and figures without repeating every value in prose.
• Discussion: interpret findings in relation to the question and literature, address uncertainty and alternative explanations, and distinguish supported implications from speculation.
• Conclusion: state the contribution proportionately. Do not introduce new data or a major claim not developed in the manuscript.

A humanities paper may organise its argument by themes, texts or periods rather than using empirical section labels. A review should make its approach to literature selection clear even when it is not a systematic review.

Manuscript files and layout

Prepare an editable DOCX manuscript. For LaTeX, supply the source, bibliography, figure files and a compiled PDF with all required dependencies. Use readable text, consistent heading levels and standard mathematical notation. Equations must be editable rather than screenshots.

Place each table near its first mention or clearly mark its intended location. Cite every figure, table and supplement in the text. Do not embed essential results only in an external link.

File naming and organisation

Use short descriptive names such as Main_manuscript.docx, Title_page.docx, Figure_1.tif, Table_1.docx and Supplement_1.csv. Revision files should identify the revision number and whether the file is clean or marked. Do not put passwords, participant names or confidential details in filenames.

Use a readable 11- or 12-point font, consistent spacing and continuous line numbering for the review manuscript. Avoid text boxes for the main narrative. Keep tracked changes and comments out of the clean version, but supply a marked version when a revision requires it.

LaTeX package

Provide the primary .tex file, every included .tex file, bibliography source or generated .bbl, required style files not available through a standard distribution, and separate figures. Compile the package in a clean folder before submission. The review PDF must match the source. Do not include unrelated files, executables, local credentials or machine-specific paths.

Equations and scientific notation

Use an equation editor or LaTeX for mathematics. Define symbols when first introduced, distinguish variables from units and number only equations referenced in the text. Check minus signs, subscripts, superscripts and Greek characters in the generated PDF. Explain specialised notation so that reviewers can follow the reasoning.

Language, clarity and inclusion

Use clear English with consistent British or American spelling. Explain specialised terms for readers outside the immediate subfield. Describe people and communities respectfully, using terminology appropriate to the research context and participants’ preferences.

Distinguish sex and gender where relevant and report what was measured. Avoid generalisations unsupported by the sampling design. Language-editing services are optional and cannot guarantee acceptance.

Precision and respectful reporting

Use the same term for the same concept throughout the manuscript. Where a term has a disputed or context-specific meaning, define how it is used. Avoid implying causation from an association unless the design and assumptions support a causal interpretation.

Describe eligibility and demographic categories exactly as they were recorded. Explain who assigned a category and why it is relevant. Do not treat broad ethnic, national or social categories as biological explanations without an appropriate scientific basis. Avoid deficit framing of communities or generalisations from a narrow sample.

Use person-first or identity-first terminology as appropriate to the disciplinary context and community preferences. Where historical sources contain discriminatory language, explain its relevance and context rather than reproducing it casually. Preserve the accuracy of quotations while clearly distinguishing the source’s language from the author’s own description.

Authors, affiliations and correspondence

List only people who meet the authorship criteria and accept accountability for the paper. Use the same spelling and order throughout the manuscript and submission record. Each affiliation should identify the relevant department, institution, city and country; connect authors to affiliations with superscript numbers.

Identify the corresponding author responsible for communications and a working email. Describe individual contributions using clear roles, such as conceptualisation, methodology, investigation, analysis, software, writing and supervision. Acknowledge other contributions separately. Obtain consent before naming acknowledged individuals.

For group authorship, explain the group’s role and identify the accountable authors and member list. Equal-contribution statements require agreement from the authors concerned.

Affiliation and contribution format

Affiliation structure: Department or unit, institution, city, country. If work was completed at one institution and an author has since moved, distinguish the research affiliation from the current address.

Contribution statements must say what people actually did. Funding acquisition, routine data collection, supervision or language editing alone do not automatically establish authorship. All authors must approve the submitted version and be able to explain their contribution and the accountability arrangements for the work.

Corresponding author responsibilities

• Obtain agreement from all authors before submission and material changes.
• Check that the manuscript, metadata and author order are consistent.
• Manage editorial correspondence and circulate decisions and proofs to co-authors.
• Retain the information needed to respond to questions about data, permissions and ethics.
• Notify the editor of substantial errors or unresolved authorship disputes promptly.

If a group or consortium is named as an author, explain who meets authorship criteria and how responsibility is assigned. A list of participants, supporters or institutional partners must not be presented as an author list without an appropriate basis.

Methods, statistics and reporting

Describe the design, setting, sampling, recruitment, materials, procedures and analysis in enough detail to evaluate the work. Explain exclusions, missing data, sample-size decisions, measurement validity and departures from a registered plan. Identify software and versions.

Report effect sizes and uncertainty where appropriate, distinguish exploratory from confirmatory analyses, and avoid equating statistical significance with practical importance. Describe qualitative coding, reflexivity and interpretive procedures where relevant. Report negative findings and limitations honestly.

Use the reporting checklist relevant to the design: for example, CONSORT for randomised trials, STROBE for observational studies, PRISMA for systematic reviews, SPIRIT for trial protocols or ARRIVE for animal experiments. Explain when a checklist is not applicable.

Quantitative research checklist

• State the study design, setting, dates, eligibility criteria and recruitment or sampling method.
• Explain the sample-size rationale, unit of analysis and number of independent units. Distinguish repeated observations from independent participants or experimental units.
• Define primary and secondary outcomes, exposure and predictor variables, measurement instruments and relevant validation evidence.
• Describe randomisation, allocation concealment, blinding and comparison groups where used.
• Explain data cleaning, missing-data handling, exclusions, transformations, model selection and assumption checks.
• Report effect estimates with suitable uncertainty, exact sample sizes and the meaning of error bars. Explain adjustments for multiple testing where relevant.
• Identify preregistered hypotheses and analyses, and label deviations or exploratory analyses.

Qualitative and mixed-methods research

Explain the research orientation, setting, participant or source selection, data-generation procedures, interviewer or researcher role, coding and interpretation process. Describe how the analysis addresses credibility, reflexivity, contradictory evidence and contextual limitations. Provide carefully anonymised excerpts where appropriate. Mixed-methods papers should explain why methods were combined and how the strands were integrated.

Systematic reviews and evidence synthesis

State the review question, protocol or registration where available, databases and other sources, complete search strategy, last search date, eligibility criteria and screening process. Explain extraction, risk-of-bias assessment and synthesis methods. Provide a selection flow diagram. For a meta-analysis, describe effect measures, heterogeneity, sensitivity analyses and limitations in the evidence base. Do not describe an unsystematic collection of favourable studies as comprehensive evidence.

Computational research

Identify dataset versions and provenance, train/validation/test separation, preprocessing, baselines, metrics, hyperparameter selection and computational environment. Prevent data leakage. Report enough information to reproduce the main evaluation, explain unavailable resources and discuss privacy or misuse risks where relevant.

Ethics, consent and registration

Research involving people, personal information, animals or regulated materials must include the relevant approval or exemption, committee name and identifying reference where issued. Explain consent, protections for vulnerable participants and any consent for identifiable publication. Do not publish identifying details merely because they were collected.

Provide applicable prospective study registration and distinguish it from ethics approval. Describe necessary collection permits, biosafety controls and community permissions. Where approval was not required, give the basis for that conclusion rather than omitting the statement.

Required content of an ethics statement

Identify the approving or exempting body, approval or exemption reference where issued, and the applicable consent arrangements. If formal review was not required, explain the basis and relevant institutional or regulatory context. An unsupported sentence saying “ethical issues were considered” is insufficient.

For research involving children or people who cannot independently consent, describe appropriate guardian permission and assent or other safeguards. Consent to participate does not necessarily include consent to publish identifiable images or quotations; assess these separately.

For secondary data, identify the source, permission or licence, and whether the use involves identifiable information. Public availability does not automatically remove ethical obligations. Explain anonymisation and disclosure risks without claiming absolute anonymity where re-identification remains possible.

For animals, report species, numbers, welfare measures, humane endpoints and relevant approval or exemption. For field research, identify permits and permissions and avoid publishing precise locations that would endanger protected species or communities.

Registration and retrospective claims

Where prospective trial registration is required, provide the registry, identifier and registration date. Explain any retrospective registration accurately. Do not invent approval numbers, describe a pending application as approved or present retrospective approval as a substitute for required prior review.

Funding, interests and AI disclosure

Name funding sources and grant numbers where applicable, and state the funder’s role in design, analysis, writing and publication decisions. Declare financial and non-financial interests or explicitly state that none exist.

Disclose material generative-AI assistance and describe its purpose. AI tools cannot be authors. Human authors remain responsible for accuracy, originality, data integrity and every reference. Do not supply confidential participant or manuscript information to external tools without an authorised basis.

Declaration examples and required adaptation

The following are wording patterns to adapt only when they are true:

• No external funding: “The authors received no external funding for this work.” Do not use this if a grant, commercial payment or in-kind support funded the research.
• Funding received: “[Funder] supported this work under [grant identifier]. The funder’s role was [describe role or state no role where accurate].”
• No competing interests: “The authors declare no competing interests relevant to this work.” Check non-financial as well as financial interests before using it.
• Restricted data: “The data are not publicly available because [specific restriction]. Requests may be considered through [actual access process] subject to [conditions].” Do not promise access the authors cannot lawfully grant.
• AI assistance: “The authors used [tool and version where known] for [purpose]. The authors reviewed the output and take responsibility for the final content.” Describe material use rather than concealing it behind a generic sentence.

Disclose relevant employment, consulting, stock ownership, patents, paid expert testimony, advisory roles and personal or institutional relationships. A declared interest does not by itself invalidate research, but undisclosed interests can undermine assessment.

Preparing references

Every in-text citation must have a matching reference-list entry, and every listed reference must be cited. Verify names, dates, titles, publication details and DOI links against the original source. Cite primary sources where possible. Identify preprints and corrections accurately; do not cite a retracted work as valid evidence without explaining its status.

Use the journal’s required style: APA 7 for Education, Psychology, Social Sciences and Business and Management; Vancouver for Public Health; IEEE for Computer Science; Chicago notes and bibliography or consistent MLA 9 for Humanities. Economics, Agriculture and Environmental Studies use a consistent author–date style.

Author–date styles cite author and year in the text; numbered styles cite sources in the required numerical sequence. Do not mix systems. Unpublished communications require permission and should be identified as such rather than presented as peer-reviewed evidence.

Reference patterns by citation system

These are structural examples, not references to real publications. Replace every bracketed field with verified bibliographic information.

In-text citation rules

In an author–date system, use the author and year at the point where the source supports the statement. Distinguish works with the same author and year consistently. Follow the chosen style for multiple authors and direct-quotation page numbers.

In a numbered system, assign numbers in the order required by the journal’s reference style, reuse the same number for the same source and keep numbering aligned after revisions. Do not create a new reference entry every time a source is cited.

Verification before submission

1. Open each source and verify that it supports the claim attributed to it.
2. Check author order, title, year, volume, issue, page range or article number.
3. Resolve the DOI or persistent identifier and remove broken or invented identifiers.
4. Identify preprints, conference abstracts and non-peer-reviewed sources accurately.
5. Check for corrections or retractions relevant to the cited finding.
6. Reconcile the in-text citations with the final reference list.

Do not fabricate citations with a reference manager or AI tool. If a source cannot be verified, remove or correct it. Avoid excessive self-citation or irrelevant citations requested to increase a person’s or journal’s metrics.

Figures, images and captions

Supply original figure files as well as the manuscript version. Use vector formats for plots and diagrams where practical; provide raster images at sufficient resolution for the final publication size, normally at least 300 dpi. Avoid upscaling low-quality images. Label panels consistently and include readable scales, units and legends.

Captions should explain each panel, symbols, abbreviations and statistical annotations without requiring the reader to infer them. Document any permissible image adjustment and apply it consistently; do not selectively remove, enhance or fabricate features. Secure permission for third-party images.

Production specifications

Image integrity

Do not remove, duplicate, relocate or selectively enhance an image feature in a way that changes the meaning. Global adjustments to brightness or contrast must not obscure relevant information and should be explained where material. Indicate spliced lanes, assembled panels and other combinations clearly. Retain uncropped originals for relevant image-based analyses.

Caption checklist

Include a concise title, panel descriptions, sample or experimental context, definitions of symbols and abbreviations, units, scale bars and the meaning of statistical annotations. Identify what error bars represent and the number of independent observations where applicable. State any necessary credit and licence or permission information.

Tables and equations

Provide editable tables with concise titles, defined column headings, units and explanatory footnotes. Avoid screenshots and unnecessary duplication of values already shown in figures. Explain abbreviations and the meaning of uncertainty estimates.

Number equations when they are referenced in the text, define symbols and use consistent notation. Ensure mathematical expressions remain intelligible in an accessible text or editable source format.

Table construction

Use one variable or category per clearly labelled column. Put units in the heading rather than repeating them in every cell. Define symbols and missing-value codes in footnotes. Show an appropriate and consistent number of decimal places; avoid apparent precision that the measurements do not support.

Explain whether a value is a count, percentage, mean with standard deviation, median with interquartile range or another summary. State denominators where they differ. Distinguish missing, not measured and zero values. Verify that totals and percentages agree with the text and abstract.

A table should be understandable without searching the main text for every definition. However, do not reproduce an entire dataset as a main-text table when a concise summary and a responsibly shared dataset would be more useful.

Accessibility and alternative text

Provide a short alternative-text description for every meaningful figure. Describe the central information and relationships conveyed rather than only naming the chart type. Keep detailed numerical values in the figure caption, table or accompanying text where needed.

Use sufficient contrast and avoid colour as the only way to distinguish groups. Combine colour with labels, patterns or shapes. Check that text remains readable at final size and that information survives greyscale printing.

Writing useful alternative text

Weak: “Bar chart.” More useful: “The chart compares the three study groups; the intervention group has the highest average outcome and the control group the lowest.” Adapt the description to the actual findings, and include relevant uncertainty or exceptions rather than implying a difference that the evidence does not support.

For a diagram, describe the main components and their relationship. For an image, explain the feature relevant to the study, not incidental visual details. A complex figure may need a brief alt description plus a longer explanation in the caption or text.

Use text labels as well as colour keys. Avoid red–green distinctions as the sole cue. Check labels at the intended page size and use a logical reading order in diagrams and tables.

Supplementary material and appendices

Supply supplementary methods, additional analyses, data dictionaries, code instructions or media only when they support the paper. Number each item, give it a descriptive title and cite it in the manuscript. Essential methods and findings must remain in the main article.

Use accessible, documented file formats: PDF or DOCX for supplementary text, CSV/XLSX for tables, and established image, audio or video formats. Include a README for code and complex data. Do not upload executable software, passwords, participant identifiers or material for which publication rights are absent. Explain specialised formats and software requirements.

Supplement inventory

List every supplementary file in the manuscript, with a label, title, description and file format. Explain the software needed to open specialised formats. For code, include a README describing installation, dependencies, versions, input files and the steps needed to reproduce the main outputs.

For data tables, include a data dictionary defining variables, units, missing-value codes and any transformations. Remove direct and indirect identifiers where required. Sharing must be consistent with consent, ethics approval, agreements and applicable law.

For audio or video, explain what the file shows, its duration and any necessary transcript or captions. Obtain permission for identifiable voices and images. Do not include copyrighted music or other third-party material without an appropriate right to distribute it.

Appendices versus supplementary files

An appendix belongs with the article when it is necessary to understand the argument or method. Supplementary material provides supporting detail. Neither should be used to conceal a major limitation or relocate essential results beyond the reach of reviewers and readers.

Data and code availability

Include a statement explaining where supporting data and code can be accessed, with repository links and persistent identifiers where available. Identify versions and licences. If privacy, consent, security, legal or third-party restrictions prevent sharing, describe the restriction and any permitted access procedure.

Deposit research material in a suitable durable repository where possible. A statement that data are available on request should explain who can request them and the conditions. Do not place confidential records in public supplementary files.

Reproducibility package

• Identify the dataset and code version used for the reported results.
• Provide a file inventory and a README with the order of analysis steps.
• Describe dependencies, random seeds where relevant, parameter settings and necessary hardware.
• Separate raw, cleaned and derived data where access rights permit sharing.
• Explain which outputs correspond to each main table or figure.
• State the licence and any restrictions on use or redistribution.

When full sharing is not possible, consider a lawful de-identified extract, synthetic demonstration data, analysis code or a description of controlled access. Do not label a dataset “anonymous” unless the disclosure risks have been appropriately assessed.

Originality, copyright and permissions

Submit original scholarship and declare related manuscripts, prior publication and preprints. Do not submit the same manuscript to multiple journals at once. Quote and cite reused text appropriately and identify reused data or figures.

The open-access policy provides for author-retained copyright and CC BY 4.0 licensing through the applicable publication agreement. Third-party material may have different terms and must be clearly labelled. Obtain the necessary permissions before publication.

Read the rights policy →

Permissions audit

Before submission, identify every reused figure, table, substantial quotation, questionnaire, photograph or other protected item. Check the licence and its compatibility with the planned publication. A citation credits a source but does not automatically grant permission to reproduce its material.

Where permission is required, retain written evidence identifying the material, permitted uses and any required credit line. For adapted material, state the adaptation and source. Clearly separate third-party material excluded from the article’s general licence.

Related versions

Explain how a submission differs from a thesis, report or conference version where these exist. Cite earlier dissemination and disclose overlapping data. The editor needs enough information to assess originality and duplicate-publication concerns.

Cover letter and journal fit

Provide a concise cover letter naming the journal and article type, explaining the research question, contribution and fit, and disclosing related work or prior editorial discussions. Include a short scope statement of up to 200 words if the fit needs explanation.

Reviewer suggestions, if requested, must identify genuine experts and disclose relevant relationships. Do not provide fabricated identities or contact details. Editors decide independently whom to invite.

Cover-letter checklist

• Journal name and article type.
• Specific research question and principal contribution.
• Why the manuscript fits the journal and readership.
• Relevant preprints, theses, reports or related manuscripts.
• Any necessary explanation of ethics, permissions, restricted data or exceptional length.
• Confirmation that the corresponding author has obtained author approval and that the manuscript is not simultaneously submitted elsewhere.

Do not include claims of guaranteed impact, unsupported praise, threats or requests to bypass review. The cover letter should help the editor assess fit and context; it does not replace information required in the manuscript.

Revision, proofs and the scholarly record

For a revision, provide a point-by-point response explaining each change or giving a reasoned response where a change was not made. Supply a clean manuscript and a version with changes marked. Update word counts, figures, statements and references consistently.

During proof review, check names, affiliations, equations, figures, tables and identifiers carefully. Material scientific changes require editorial assessment. After publication, report errors promptly so the appropriate correction or other notice can be considered.

Corrections, appeals and retractions →

Point-by-point response format

Organise the response by editor and reviewer. Quote or accurately paraphrase each comment, then explain the action taken and identify the revised page, line or section. Where no change was made, give a concise scholarly reason and supporting evidence. Avoid dismissive or personal language.

Response pattern: “Comment: [issue]. Response: [what we changed or why we disagree]. Location: [section and line numbers].” This is a template, not evidence that any particular reviewer request has been addressed.

Final proof checks

1. Confirm author names, order, affiliations and correspondence details.
2. Read equations, units, tables, figure labels and captions against the accepted files.
3. Check references, supplementary links and any assigned identifiers.
4. Check funding, conflicts, ethics, contribution and data statements.
5. Report material scientific changes to the editor rather than quietly altering accepted findings.

Proof review is primarily a production check. A material change in analysis, authorship or conclusion may require renewed editorial assessment.

Fees, waivers and submission delivery

Publication fee amounts, waiver arrangements and refund terms have not yet been published. Online payments are not active. Fees must be disclosed before a payment is requested and must not influence editorial acceptance.

The manuscript form delivers a PDF and author details to private editorial storage and provides a submission reference after storage is confirmed. Author accounts and a full review dashboard are not yet available.

Manuscript preparation → · Fee information →

Payment and acceptance are separate

Authors must receive clear information about the amount, currency, applicable taxes or charges, waiver arrangements and refund conditions before payment is requested. An invoice must identify the relevant manuscript. Do not pay an unofficial account or a person claiming that payment guarantees acceptance.

The website’s payment functionality remains inactive until the merchant account, database and verification steps are complete. The presence of a payment page does not mean that a publication fee has been approved. Manuscript delivery uses the separate submission form.