Research Stir Science E-Journal

Peer Reviewed Research Articles in Natural Sciences

The Research Stir Journal is an online only peer reviewed scientific magazine with copyrights assigned to the publishing scientists and with open access to public. Being online only magazine, we are free of the costs, publishing cycle time and space availability drawbacks of printed magazines. As such the research Stir Journal functions as an inexpensive, rapid publishing system with instant publishing of accepted manuscripts.

We apply an innovative open peer review system allowing very quick publication cycle of scientific articles. To keep the publishing cost at minimum to scientists, and the publishing cycle at maximum pace, we request authors to arrange for reviews of their manuscripts by peers willing to do it on a pro bono basis (or for a future reciprocal review favor). We publish the peer reviews along with manuscripts, however we withhold the reviewers names. Our Journal has no space limit, covers all disciplines of natural sciences and is published in 12 issues annually. We publish the received peer reviewed manuscripts instantly, but we close consecutive issues only at the end of each month.

We apply "results blind" decision in determining whether to accept manuscript for publication. That means we are free of the bias of other scientific journals, which most frequently favor publishing of manuscripts that report statistically significant findings. In our view, scientific manuscripts should be accepted for publication based primarily on the judged importance and relevance of the reported study. We pay maximum importance to the properness and accuracy of applied methodology (including that of data analysis). Applying this kind of editorial review we encourage authors to submit to our journal manuscripts reporting also, what might be considered as nonsignificant results. By publishing such manuscripts we might help to expose studies that have shown significant results backed by a p-value of 0.05 and achieved because of chance alone. In a theoretical case if even one study concerning effectiveness of a truly ineffective drug is published, then authors of multiple follow up studies reporting no effect of the studied drug might feel discouraged to submit their results for publication based on the perceived nonsignificant results of their studies. We firmly stand that publishing of such "insignificant" results can help the scientific audience to be rightly skeptical of the other significant findings.  

W are in the process of soliciting manuscripts to our initial issues.