We have received very positive and widespread feedback after the release of our statement. The positive feedback comes not only from within the field: scholars from other fields have also expressed support and suggested that journals in their fields undergo similar reforms. Within a few days, over 1200 scholars have signed up to review manuscripts for "Imaging Neuroscience". In less than a year since its founding, we have received 800 submissions and published 150 high-quality papers. After rigorous peer review (usually 2-3 rounds), we have accepted approximately 35% of submissions. The academic community has confidence in the editing team of "Imaging Neuroscience" and is committed to building the new journal.

We expect to release more information related to the impact factor of "Imaging Neuroscience" in the coming years. "Imaging Neuroscience" has been listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ). The MIT Press has applied to include "Imaging Neuroscience" in PubMed search results, and if successful, all new and previously published papers from this journal will be searchable in PubMed. Similarly, we have applied for inclusion in Scopus and Web of Science/ESCI/JCR

(0) 讚！ | 慕白ss

The editing team of "Imaging Neuroscience", the research field, and the control of paper quality are completely consistent with the editorial team of "NeuroImage" and "NeuroImage: Reports" before the editorial team resigned.

The editing team of "Imaging Neuroscience" includes one chief editor, 11 senior editors, and 31 associate editors; it is a highly committed and dedicated team composed of leading experts in the field. In addition, we also have an editorial board consisting of over 60 renowned scholars who provide the core editing team with richer experience and professional knowledge, and they also participate in the journal's strategic planning, serving as "trusted representatives" of the current development in the field

(0) 讚！ | 慕白ss

In April 2023, all 43 editors of the journals "NeuroImage" and "NeuroImage: Reports" collectively resigned. One month later, this editorial team (referred to as "us") founded "Imaging Neuroscience". For a long time, "NeuroImage" has been the flagship journal in the field of neuroimaging, both in terms of quality and quantity of papers, but its high publishing costs were considered unethical and unsustainable by all editors (and colleagues in the neuroimaging community). Despite several rounds of negotiations, the publisher of "NeuroImage", Elsevier, refused to lower the publishing costs, prompting us to collaborate with the MIT Press to create "Imaging Neuroscience" with the aim of replacing "NeuroImage" as the new flagship journal in the field. We see "Imaging Neuroscience" as the successor to "NeuroImage", with the key difference being that the academic community has greater control over the new journal in terms of adopting "modern" and "ethical" publishing practices (including publishing costs

(0) 讚！ | 慕白ss

This magazine is completely useless now. Due to its high fees, it has been almost blacklisted by all the big shots in the field of neuroimaging

(0) 讚！ | 彬冰

Is it an OA journal?

(0) 讚！ | hayuyi

Can this journal only choose OA?

(0) 讚！ | jlr666

So are you accepting it?

(0) 讚！ | Ron Tommy

Accepted with revisions, everything was fast except for the review time, with two weeks for initial review and two weeks for review after revisions

(0) 讚！ | 小耗子

An email was sent from the system to remind you, and the revised draft has been returned with comments

(0) 讚！ | 小耗子

The same situation, it feels like it's related to a large number of editors resigning. Is there any new progress upstairs? Do we need to remind the editors?

(0) 讚！ | zsq0616

I have been with the editor for over two months, and it still hasn't been reviewed. I feel hopeless!

(0) 讚！ | 小耗子

How do magazines recommend reviewers?

(0) 讚！ | 巴蜀书妍

Submitted on December 28, 2021;
Notified of major revisions three months later;
Returned for minor revisions in June;
Accepted on July 11, 2022.

Both reviewers asked professional questions, with one being particularly meticulous. After half a year of submission, it was finally accepted.

(6) 讚！ | FrankPub

Received by the editor, the article was sent for review after 4 days. The first review result was given after 2 months, followed by major revisions which were accepted one month later. There were three reviewers, one of whom provided 8 very high-level comments but no suggestions, another gave two suggestions for acceptance, and the third had no suggestions but recommended acceptance. The editor requested major revisions, which were completed and accepted after one month. The review process was fast, and the reviewers demonstrated a high level of expertise.

(33) 讚！ | 这个这个这个

With the editor, it usually takes about two weeks. After the editor approves it, it is sent for review. Rejections are also typically given within two weeks. The speed is considered quite fast.

(0) 讚！ | 这个这个这个

First job in reading a doctorate... The reviewer's comments are constructive. However, as I read more papers, I found that the quality of the content varies. In the future, I will continue to consider submitting some small works or unsatisfactory results to this journal.

(3) 讚！ | alex_zhao_zi

Different journals may have different requirements, so it's important to follow the specific guidelines of each journal

(0) 讚！ | 维尔娜菲茨杰拉德

Journal official websites will have author guidance, and there will be detailed formatting requirements on the page

(0) 讚！ | 维尔娜菲茨杰拉德

Are the format requirements the same for each journal?

(0) 讚！ | 上清雨真

How to find the format requirements of a specific journal?

(0) 讚！ | 龙鳞孝礼

Review speed: 6.0 | Submission acceptance rate: 25.0 | Layout fee: 3000.0
Research focus: Image experience sharing: The first review took 2.5 months, and after 2 months, a reminder was sent. The feedback required major revisions, which took 1.5 months, then resubmitted. The second review took 1 month, and the feedback only required minor revisions. After making changes for half a month and resubmitting, it was accepted after another month. The whole process took a total of 6.5 months

(0) 讚！ | 西域鸿吉

The first SCI paper of my life was rejected after two months. The feedback was quite good, but I am not skilled enough.

(15) 讚！ | 幸毛虎

Reviewing takes time, please be patient

(0) 讚！ | 水月戊寅

Reviewing is slow and requires patience.

(1) 讚！ | ephan

It's still a little over 5 points, although there hasn't been much change. Being able to stay stable is considered above average

(0) 讚！ | 凌霄高洁