1. When an article is submitted the Associate Editors scans the article in order to assign 2 Review Editors.
2. If the Associate Editor notices that the general quality is obviously well below acceptable standards during this scan, he/she may recommend to the Specialty Chief Editor to reject the article without sending it out for review.
3. In such case, the Specialty Chief Editor must examine the article and decide whether is should indeed be rejected or whether the Associate Editor should send the article out for review. Only the Specialty Chief Editor may reject an article without sending it out for review.
4. Invited Review Editors are obliged to accept/decline a review invitation within 2 business days.
5. When a review invitation is accepted, each Review Editor performs an independent and objective review assessment of the article based on a standardized review template. This is called the "Independent Review Report", because each Review Editor performs the review independently of each other. The Independent Review Report is solely focused on the article and is completely transparent - there is no need for an accompanying letter to the Associate Editor, or for Review Recommendations to accept/reject the article.
6. When the Independent Review Reports are completed, the Associate Editor is obliged to activate the "Real-Time Interactive - Review Forum", in which case the Authors are automatically alerted to enter the Interactive Review Forum, view the Independent Review Reports of each Review Editor, and prepare their responses as well as their re-submission.
7. Even if the Independent Review Reports are unfavorable to the authors, the Interactive Review Forum must be activated to allow the Authors the opportunity of rebuttal.
8. In the Interactive Review Forum, all participants (Author, Review Editors, Associate Editor, and if need be, the Chief Editor) can view each others reports, replies and comments, and interact with each other in real-time.
9. The goal of the Interactive Review is to facilitate convergence of opinions. In case of disagreements and conflicts, the Author, Reviewers and the Associate Editor should give their opinion and converge on an acceptable revision.
10. The Review is completed when both Review Editors consider their suggestions satisfactorily addressed. In such case, each Review Editor finalizes their review, which signals to the Associate Editor that the article is ready for acceptance.
11. The Associate Editor has the final responsibility to accept the article for publication. This action does not require the approval of the Chief Editor.
12. After acceptance, the Authors receive an automatic notification to submit the Publication Fee, in which case the article is forwarded for processing and publication.
13. Review Editors are invited to publish a one-page joint commentary to be linked to the published article. Review Editors may decline.
14. If conflicts arise during the Interactive Review that cannot be resolved to the satisfaction of one Review Editor, he/she may chose to withdraw from the review in which case his/her identity remains anonymous. In such a case, the Associate Editor is obliged to invite another Review Editor.
15. If both Review Editors agree that an article has insurmountable problems/objective errors that the Authors cannot or are unwilling to address, the Associate Editor may either, finalize the review process and recommend to the Specialty Chief Editor to reject the article, or invite a new set of Review Editors.
16. In case of a recommended rejection, the Specialty Chief Editor is obliged to enter the Interactive Review Forum of this article, examine the reviews and interactions and make the final decision if the article should indeed be rejected. Only the Specialty Chief Editors can reject an article after review.
17. The identity of the Reviewers remains anonymous in case the article is rejected.

Author Rights & Responsibilities
Frontiers support Author rights to publish their research through a fair peer review system and to own the right to reproduce and disseminate their article freely.

Author Rights:

1. the right to demand immediate internet publication of a brief Paper Pending Abstract based on a submitted article, provided the accompanying article is accepted for in-depth review.
2. the right to initiate an arbitration at any stage of the submissions and review process if they feel that the handling of their article has been biased.
3. the right to demand publication of their submitted article following review by two Review Editors, unless Review Editors can identify objective errors.
4. the right to own their article and reproduce and disseminate freely in any way they chose and freely disseminate these as reprints (see also copyrights).

Author Obligations and Responsibilities:

1. Authors must agree to the Frontiers Academic Model policy applied to the Frontiers Journal Series and Author must agree to the Frontiers Review Guidelines.
2. Authors are obliged to fulfill Review Editor revision requests related to validity of experiments and flaws in the results and analysis.
3. Authors are encouraged, but not obliged, to meet all revision requirements of the Review Editors aimed at enhancing the quality of the research and the written article as pertains to interpretation of results. Authors need to be aware that Review Editors may withdraw if they feel that the Authors are unwilling to make important changes. Withdrawal of a Review Editor will delay the review process, since a new Review Editor will have to be invited.
4. Authors are obliged to pay a Community Fee and a Publication Fee for the handling and publication of their research. Authors are not responsible for any additional costs such as hard copy publication, colored figures, etc.
5. Authors are obliged to pass full user rights to Frontiers to publish and promote the article as it chooses including dissemination through third parties
6. Authors must register with Frontiers and submit a CV and list of publications. The publications are used to automatically construct an Author Citation Impact, which will be used to assign Review Editors with the appropriate level of expertise and experience. The Author Profile is also used in the Frontiers Evaluation System of articles, a novel objective and democratic way to evaluate scientific excellence and social relevance of academic publications.

Review Editors Rights & Responsibilities
Frontiers supports a reviewer`s right to object to ungrounded claims made by researchers, to remain anonymous during the review process and to be acknowledged on articles on which the reviewer contributed.

Review Editor Rights:

1. The right to object to the publication of a research work, but not to enforce rejection.
2. The right to decline to review an article for the following reasons:
1. time constraints,
2. conflict of interest,
3. the article does not meet the ethic standards of the Frontiers Journals,
4. the general quality of the article is obviously below acceptable standards.
3. The right to remain anonymous until the end of the review process.
4. The right to request Arbitration in the event that an issue remains unresolved.
5. The right to withdraw from the review of an article in case of a fundamental disagreement that cannot be resolved, in which case they reserve the right to remain anonymous.

Review Editor Obligations and Responsibilities:

1. Review Editors are required to accept the Authors Rights and Responsibilities clause as well as all Frontiers Academic Review Policies of Frontiers Academic Model in general.
2. Review Editors are required to accept/decline the review process within 2 business days by entering the review site that will be prepared for the article.
3. After accepting a review invitation, Review Editors are obliged to firstly, provide a standardized in-depth review (the Independent Review Report) and secondly, respond to questions/comments and generally communicate directly with the Authors in the Real-Time Interactive Review Forum.
4. Review Editors are obliged to release their identities upon successful completion of the review process, that is after the article is accepted for publication. The contribution of Review Editors is acknowledged on the publication.

Associate Editor Rights & Responsibilities
Associate Editor Rights:

1. The right to appoint and remove Review Editors from their Review Editorial Board.
2. The right to choose the Review Editors for an article.
3. The right to initiate Arbitration in the case of dead end disputes.
4. The right to review articles (but are not obliged to) when Review Editors cannot be found to review an article, which has sufficient quality.
5. The right to remove a Review Editor from the review process if their actions and review is considered to be against the Frontiers Review Guidelines.
6. The right to accept the article for publication after successful review.

Associate Editor Obligations and Responsibilities:

1. Associate Editors are required to accept the Authors Rights and Responsibilities clause, as well as all Frontiers Academic Review Policies and the Frontiers Academic Model in general.
2. Associate Editors are obliged to appoint Review Editors to submitted articles as long as there is no automated Review Editor selection system. Upon installation of the automated Review Editor selection system the Associate Editors are obliged to monitor the Review Editor selection process.
3. Associate Editors are obliged to monitor the review process unfolding on the Frontiers and promptly handle any problems arising as well as ensure the timeliness of the review process.
4. Associate Editors are obliged to handle the review process of all submitted work without any bias or discrimination and ensure that the Review Editors perform the review timely and fairly.
5. Associate Editors are responsible for enforcing the Frontiers Review Guidelines.
6. Associate Editors are obliged to introduce an expert arbitrator or may themselves act as arbitrators between Authors and Review Editors in case of unresolved disputes.

Specialty Chief Editor Rights & Responsibilities
Specialty Chief Editor Rights:

1. The right to appoint and remove Associate Editors from their Editorial Board and recommend to the Associate Editors to appoint or remove Review Editors.
2. Specialty Chief Editors reserve the right to remove an Associate Editor during the review process if the Frontiers Review Guidelines are not being upheld.
3. The right to accept articles for publication.
4. The right to reject articles for publication.

Specialty Chief Editor Obligations and Responsibilities:

1. Specialty Chief Editors are required to accept the Authors Rights and Responsibilities clause, as well as all Frontiers Academic Review Policies and the Frontiers Academic Model in general.
2. Specialty Chief Editors must ensure that Associate Editors perform their duties and act according to the Frontiers Review Guidelines.
3. Specialty Chief Editors are responsible for upholding and enforcing the Frontiers Review Guidelines.
4. Specialty Chief Editors are required to promote their Frontiers Specialty Journal and the Frontiers Academic Model.
5. Specialty Chief Editors are obliged to act as arbitrators between Authors and Review Editors, when an Associate Editor cannot resolve the conflict alone.
6. Specialty Chief Editors may (but are not obliged to) review articles when no Review Editors can be found to review an article, which has sufficient quality.
7. Specialty Chief Editors are obliged to act as arbitrators if requested by the Associate Editor in case of unresolved conflicts between Authors and Review Editors.
8. Specialty Chief Editors are required to act as Associate Editors to the Field Journal and are responsible for overseeing the review process of those articles that are selected from their Journal to climb the tiers.
9. Specialty Chief Editors are responsible for enforcing the ethical standards of submitted research.

Field Chief Editor Rights & Responsibilities
Field Chief Editor Rights:

1. The right to appoint and remove Specialty Chief Editors. In case there are Assistant Chief Editors in the Field Journal, this decision must be unanimous.
2. The right to appoint and remove Specialty Chief Editors and recommend appointment and removal of Associate Chief Editors.

Field Chief Editor Obligations and Responsibilities:

1. Field Chief Editors are required to accept the Authors Rights and Responsibilities clause, as well as all Frontiers Academic Review Policies and the Frontiers Academic Model in general.
2. Field Chief Editors ensure that Specialty Editors perform their duties and act according to the Frontiers Review Guidelines.
3. Field Chief Editors are responsible for upholding and enforcing the Frontiers Review Guidelines.
4. Field Chief Editors are obliged to promote the Frontiers Journals and the Frontiers Academic Model.
5. Field Chief Editors are invited to the Scientific Advisory Board of Frontiers Research Foundation. Field Chief Editors responsible for overseeing the selection process for articles to climb the tiers.
6. Field Chief Editors are responsible to manage the Review of the Frontiers in Neuroscience articles show-casing the selected discoveries.
7. Field Chief Editors are responsible for enforcing the ethical standards of submitted research.

Frontiers Journals Ethics

1. The Ethics Board of Frontiers Research Foundation will define the ethics standards of all Frontiers Journals. The Ethics Board will consist of leading ethicists representing each continent in the world (in formation).
2. All articles must conform to the ethical standards set forth by the Frontiers Ethics Board.
3. The Frontiers Research Foundation will post a model ethics document for review (in preparation).

Copyrights

1. All articles published in Frontiers are open-access articles subject to an exclusive license agreement between the Authors and the Frontiers Research Foundation, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original Authors and the source are credited.
2. Authors agree that Frontiers can publish, re-publish and generally use the article and data as the Journal sees appropriate.

Frontiers Rejection Rules
General Principles for Rejecting Articles:

1. Associate Editors may suggest to reject an article for three reasons only:
1. the general quality of the article is obviously well below acceptable standards (e.g. the writing style may be too poor or incomprehensible);
2. the research performed contains objective errors;
3. the article does not meet ethical standards for scientific procedures and/or animal care.
2. Before an article is rejected for any of these reasons, an arbitration must be performed by the Associate Editor and the Specialty Chief Editors.
3. Only a Specialty Chief Editor can reject a submitted article.
4. Articles can only be rejected by Specialty Chief Editors in accordance with the Frontiers Review Guidelines.
5. The Frontiers Research Foundation Ethics Board (to be formed) must be notified of all articles rejected for ethical reasons.
6. The Frontiers Research Foundation Scientific Board (to be formed) must be notified of all articles rejected for poor quality reasons.
7. The Frontiers Research Foundation will assign ad hoc committees to screen rejected articles periodically to verify and monitor the Frontiers Rejection System.

Rejection Before Review:

1. Articles can be rejected without in depth review because either the quality of the article is obviously well below acceptable standards, the article contains obvious objective errors or the ethical standards are not met and/or the Associate Editor is unable to find 2 Review Editor willing to perform the review (after considerable effort) and neither the Associate Editor nor the Specialty Editor want to perform the review.
2. Authors of articles rejected without in-depth review because of quality will be notified that the Frontiers Journal could not find 2 expert Review Editors that were willing to review the article, because the general quality was too low. In the future, the Authors will be referred to a Frontiers Science Quality Training Center for assistance in their research and manuscript preparation.

Rejection After Review:

1. The article can be rejected after in-depth review if 1) experiments are found to be invalid or an objective error is found that cannot be corrected - this must meet the Objective Error Clause - and the Authors cannot or are unwilling to address the problem.
2. Authors and Review Editors may trigger an arbitration to resolve a dispute about an invalid experiment or objective error.
3. The Associate Editor arbitrates conflicts or calls in another expert to arbitrate.
4. If all (the Associate Editor, the Review Editor and possible Arbitrator) agree that the article cannot be accepted for above reason, then the Associate Editor may finalize the review process and recommend to the Specialty Chief Editor to reject the article.
5. In case of a recommended rejection, the Specialty Chief Editor is obliged to enter the Interactive Review Forum of this article, examine the reviews and interactions and make the final decision if the article should indeed be rejected. Only the Specialty Chief Editors can reject an article after review.
6. The Specialty Chief Editor may override the Associate Editor recommendation to reject the article and can insist to call in further Review Editors to continue the review.
7. The identity of the Reviewers remains anonymous in case the article is rejected.
8. The article pending abstract is withdrawn if an article is rejected.

Objective Error Clause

1. The Objective Error Clause states that the error identified in the research performed is one that is generally accepted by the community and not one that would be debatable by some.
2. In the case of a dispute, either Review Editors or Authors can trigger an arbitration, which will evaluate whether this is an objective error.

Arbitrations

1. Arbitration is the process of resolving a dispute by an impartial body. In many sciences such a body is not possible.
2. Authors, Review Editors or Associate Editors can trigger arbitrations.
3. At early stages of a Frontiers Journal launch, the Associate Editor arbitrates conflicts or calls in an expert to arbitrate.
4. At later phases, the Associate Editor will call in Expert Arbitrators with higher Frontiers Author Impact scores to arbitrate.
5. Specialty Chief Editors may be called into an arbitration to help resolving the dispute.
6. The Specialty Chief Editor may perform the final arbitration verdict taking into consideration the recommendations of the Associate Editor, Review Editors and/or Expert Arbitrator.

Article Acceptance

1. The Review is completed when both Review Editors consider their suggestions satisfactorily addressed. In such case, each Review Editor finalizes their review, which signals to the Associate Editor that the article is ready for acceptance. The Associate Editor has the final responsibility to accept the article for publication. This action does not require the approval of the Chief Editor. Review Editors must accept to be acknowledged on the article and must therefore be satisfied with the article they have reviewed.