Submissions

Author Guidelines

ARTICLE CATEGORY

Figure 1 shows the submission criteria. In all categories, the authors are supposed to submit a text-based manuscript with figures and tables as like the format of a conventional journal article. Besides, the authors can submit extra photos, images, sound files, and/or video clips of their illusion works, which are also subject to open peer-review.

Figure 1 The submission criteria

3.1 Phenomenal reports

In this category, the authors are supposed to submit the manuscript that qualitatively describes a scientifically novel illusion. Moreover, we accept the manuscript comparing the novel and known illusions. This category also accepts the manuscript reporting novel versions of demonstration, design, artwork, and application cases of existing illusions. Computational model studies for novel illusion are also acceptable. Quantitative data is not always necessary. The authors are required to theoretically explain why the illusion is novel and how it works. A simple report of illusion without scientifically sufficient explanations is not acceptable as an article of this category. The editorial stream of this category is shown in Figure 2. The submitted manuscript is initially evaluated by the editorial team of JOI and is returned to the authors if the manuscript is evaluated to be unsuitable for an article in JOI. The manuscript which is considered to be potentially suitable for an article in JOI is sent to reviewers. After a peer-review process, the editorial team determines the acceptance/rejection of the manuscript.

Figure 2 Editorial flow of Phenomenal reports and Review reports.

3.2 Review reports

In this category, the authors are expected to submit a manuscript that aims at theoretically advancing our knowledge about illusions by overviewing previous studies on a certain type (or several types of) of illusion. A simple summary of the previous studies is not favorable here. The editorial stream of this category is shown in Figure 2.

3.3 Registered reports

In this category, the authors are supposed to submit the manuscript that quantitatively addresses a known illusion with a clear hypothesis. Figure 3 shows the editorial stream of this category. The authors who wish to submit the manuscript of the study protocol to this category need to first register the background, experimental design, analysis plan, and hypothesis of their study before conducting experiments. Similar to the Phenomenal reports, the submitted manuscript to the Registered reports is initially evaluated by the editorial team of JOI and is returned to the authors if the manuscript is evaluated to be unsuitable for an article in JOI. The manuscript which is considered to be potentially suitable for an article in JOI is sent to the first peer-review. After the registration is approved via the first peer-review, the manuscript is treated as in-principle acceptance, in which the manuscript will be published regardless of the positivity of the results. Afterward, the authors can submit the complete manuscript that contains reports of the experimental outcome and discussion as well as the protocol. The complete manuscript will receive the second peer-review before publication. The preprint of a registered manuscript can be accessed at a dedicated section called “In the pipeline”. For more information about the general system of registered reports, see the website of The Center for Open Science (https://cos.io/rr/).

Figure 3. Editorial flow of Registered reports.

POST-PUBLICATION COMMENTARIES

The Journal of illusion will accept post-publication commentaries. Those commentaries are subject to peer review (Figure 4). We hope to collect the commentaries that have passed peer review and merge them with the original paper so that we can publish an updated version of the original paper with the comments at a later date. JOI assigns a doi not only to an original article but also to each of the post-publication commentaries.

Basically, the comments will be checked and sorted by the action editor, who was responsible for the original article. If for various reasons the action editor cannot engage in the check, a new action editor will be designated by the Editor-in-Chief. The action editor will judge whether the comment is publishable on the basis of the following criteria:

• Is the comment academically and socially beneficial?
• Is the rationale of the comment scientifically clear?
• Is the claim in the comment original?

Figure 4. Editorial flow of post-publication commentary.

MANUSCRIPT PREPARATION

When submitting, the manuscript can be prepared with the style as the authors like. Any style is OK if the manuscript includes title, author names, contact information, abstract, body text, reference list, and acknowledgments. Additional sections such as footnotes may be included if necessary. For file format of the manuscript, we prefer .pdf. For reviewers to evaluate the illusion in the best condition, figures and/or movies should be prepared with high resolution and audio files with high quality sound. If possible, please include the tables and figures in the manuscript file at the appropriate points.

After acceptance, we will ask the authors to submit the text in .docx; figures in .jpg, .png, .tif, or .eps; audios in .mp3 or .wav, and movies in .mp4. Upon acceptance, authors will also be required to revise their reference lists and in-text citations in accordance with JOI's reference style, before the manuscript is copyedited and typeset. Authors who would like to apply JOI’s style to their reference section before submission are welcome to consult the instructions below.

REFERENCES

The JOI style is outlined below for authors who wish to adopt it in their submission. References should begin on a separate page headed "REFERENCES". If a DOI has been assigned to the article that you are using, you should include this after the page numbers for the article,

In text citation rules

1. Simple reference: (Adler, 2002) for one author, (Adler & Kwon, 2002) for two authors
2. Several references: (Adler & Kwon, 2002; Maskell, 2000; Schuller, Baron & Field, 2000). Order citations alphabetically
3. More than two authors (after the first reference): (Schuller, et al., 2000). If there are more than 6 authors, please use "et al." from the start
4. Citations following a quote: (Adler & Kwon, 2002: 24)
5. Include page numbers for quotes
6. Avoid references to or citations of unpublished papers

References rules (cf. APA style)

1. Journal article: Adler, P.S. & Kwon, S.W. (2002). Social capital: Prospects for a new concept. Academy of Management Review, 27(1), 17-40, DOI: 10.2307/4134367.
2. Book: Field, J. (2004). Social capital. New York, NY: Routledge.
3. Chapter in book: Maskell, P. (2000). Social capital, innovation, and competitiveness. In S. Baron, J. Field & T. Schuller (Eds.), Social capital: Critical perspectives (pp. 111-123). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
4. Edited book: Baron, S., Field, J. & Schuller, T. (Eds.) (2000). Social capital: Critical perspectives. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
5. Dissertation: Caprette, C.L. (2005). Conquering the cold shudder: The origin and evolution of snake eyes. (Unpublished or published doctoral dissertation), Ohio State University, Columbus, OH.
6. Communications: Bailey, C. (2019, April). How to get your brain to focus. TEDxManchester. Talk presented at 2019 TEDx conference, Manchester, U.K.
7. Article in a magazine: Henry, W. A., III. (1990, April). Making the grade in today's schools. Time, 135, 28-3
8. Article from an online periodical: Bernstein, M. (2002). 10 tips on writing the living web. A List Apart: For People Who Make Websites, 149. Retrieved from https://www.alistapart.com/articles/writeliving
9. Report: American Psychiatric Association (2000). Practice guidelines for the treatment of patients with eating disorders (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: Author.