Policies and guidelines
Policy on the use of Artificial Intelligence
Authors submitting manuscripts to Nordic Perspectives on Open Science must disclose the use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) in the preparation of the article.
- If AI has been used for straightforward language correction, editing and formatting, provide a note in the footnote of the first page of the manuscript, including the name and version of the AI tool used.
- If AI has been used substantially in the research and/or writing process, the author needs to describe the use in the manuscript (e.g. in the methods section), including the name and version of the AI tool used, and – if relevant – provide the prompts.
Authors are responsible for checking the validity of the output of AI tools. An AI tool cannot be credited as author or cited as a source.
The editorial team of NOPOS do not use AI tools in the screening, assessment, copy-editing or formatting of submitted manuscripts. If the editorial team use AI to edit or rewrite their feedback to authors, this will be disclosed in the communication with the authors.
Peer reviewers do not use any AI tools to create their assessments.
If peer reviewers or the editorial team use AI to edit their feedback to authors, they will disclose this in the communication with the authors. Publicly available AI tools are not allowed for these purposes; allowed tools in these cases can be closed AI platforms that guarantee confidentiality and will not reuse input for tool training.
(This policy is based on DOAJ's recommendation for journal AI policies.)
Reviewer guidelines
Reviewers are expected to adhere to COPE’s Ethical guidelines for peer reviewers, by providing a fair and unbiased assessment of the manuscript, disclosing competing interests, being specific in their critique (read COPE’s guidelines for more information).
Reviewers cannot use generative AI tools in the preparation of their review feedback. (See the journal's policy on the use of AI tools.)
The review process in NOPOS is carried out on the journal’s publishing platform (Open Journal Systems) – NOPOS asks that reviewers submit their feedback through the platform, so that the review history is stored together with the manuscript. Review feedback can be submitted through the journal’s review form and/or as comments in the manuscript file.
If you have chosen not to disclose your identity (you must inform the editor about this when you accept the invitation to review), and you submit your review as comments in the manuscript Word file, remember to remove your personal information from the file.
You will be able to choose among the following review recommendations:
- Accept Submission
- Revisions required
- Resubmit for review
- Resubmit elsewhere
- Decline submission
Editorial review
During this "light" form of review, the editors are expected to check that the manuscript is consistent, that it does not contain factual mistakes, and presents the topic in an understandable way and with sufficient detail.
Formal peer review for the section "Research articles"
Reviewers can use the following questions for their review feedback (keep in mind that not all of the questions may be relevant for all manuscripts):
- Does the article fit with the theme of NOPOS?
- Has the author clearly explained the aim of the article and research?
- Do the authors sufficiently describe the article's significance to the field?
- Does the author link previous research clearly to the current study?
- Are the relevant references mentioned, and are there other sources you feel are crucial to the article's understanding?
- Do the authors use a sufficient amount of resources and data?
- Is the methodology used in the article sound?
- Has the author used sufficient and accurate additional materials (graphs, facts, tables, formulas, etc.) in the article?
- In case the article does not rely on empirical data, does the article's approach or argument make sense?
- Is the article's organization and structure clear?
- Does the author effectively summarize the article's conclusions?
- Is the article's language clear?
Any other detailed suggestions for revision are welcome. If you think that a submission should be moved to another section of NOPOS (Case studies, Viewpoints, Notes), notify the editor about it.
After evaluating your review, the editor will contact the author. If revisions were recommended, you may be asked to go through the revised article for further approval before publication.
Register as a potential reviewer!
If you are not yet registered as a reviewer in NOPOS and would like to contribute with your expertise register on the journal’s platform! Describe your reviewing interests in your profile, and when a suitable manuscript is submitted, an editor will contact you.
Open Access Policy
This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.
Authors retain copyright. All articles are published under a Creative Commons license; the default license in NOPOS is CC BY, but authors are free to choose another Creative Commons license.
There are no publication or submission charges.
The journal metadata are freely reusable under the terms of the Creative Commons Universal (CC0 1.0) Public Domain Dedication licence.
