⚗ EX SCIENTIA CEREBROSUS ⚗

Ex Scientia Cerebrosus is committed to upholding the highest standards of ethical research conduct, integrity, and scholarly rigor in all publications facilitated through our platform. We believe that ethical research is the foundation of scientific progress, and we take all concerns seriously.

The following guidelines represent our commitment to these principles and outline the processes by which we endeavor to maintain them, where applicable and to the extent feasible given available resources.

All manuscripts submitted to Ex Scientia Cerebrosus undergo a rigorous peer review process. Each submission is evaluated by up to one qualified reviewer with relevant expertise in the general subject area or an adjacent field. Our expedited review process (48-72 hours) ensures timely dissemination of knowledge while maintaining standards consistent with our editorial policies.

Peer review at Ex Scientia Cerebrosus is single-blind, meaning that reviewer identities are known to the editorial board but not to the author, and author identities are known to the reviewer but the reviewer is encouraged to evaluate the work as though they were not. In select cases, review may be conducted by members of the editorial board directly.

Authors submitting to Ex Scientia Cerebrosus warrant that:

• The work is original and has not been published elsewhere, or if it has, that this is clearly disclosed and probably fine
• All data presented is authentic, or represents a reasonable approximation of data that could theoretically exist
• All co-authors have approved the submission, are aware of the submission, or could not be reached despite reasonable effort (one email)
• The research did not violate any laws in the jurisdiction where it was conducted, or if it did, that the authors have a compelling explanation
• All citations are accurate, including works the author has not personally read but has seen cited elsewhere
• The described methodology could, in principle, be reproduced by a researcher with equivalent resources, expertise, and imagination

Authors bear sole and complete responsibility for the content of their submissions, including but not limited to: accuracy of data, validity of conclusions, existence of described phenomena, and any consequences arising from publication. Ex Scientia Cerebrosus serves as a platform for scholarly communication and does not independently verify research claims.

Research involving human subjects must adhere to the Declaration of Helsinki or equivalent ethical guidelines recognized by the authors' institution or country of residence. Authors must confirm that appropriate informed consent was obtained from all participants capable of providing it.

For research involving non-human entities, authors should indicate whether ethical approval was obtained where such approval processes exist. This includes, where applicable:

• Vertebrate and invertebrate animals
• Autonomous systems exhibiting responsive behavior
• Distributed consciousness networks (see Form 17-C)
• Entities whose ontological status is disputed or uncertain
• Weather patterns, if sentient

Ex Scientia Cerebrosus encourages authors to maintain research data in a form that could theoretically be shared upon request. Authors are encouraged, though not required, to respond to reasonable requests for data, methodology details, or clarification from other researchers.

We recognize that some research involves data that cannot be shared due to:

• Participant confidentiality agreements
• Proprietary restrictions
• Data that exists in a superposition state until observed
• Information that, if disseminated, could cause ontological instability
• The data having been lost in a move
• Restrictions imposed by funding bodies, governments, or entities whose existence cannot be formally acknowledged

In such cases, authors should include a statement explaining why data cannot be shared, or simply not address the matter.

Authors must disclose any conflicts of interest that could be perceived to influence their research. This includes financial relationships, ongoing sexual relationships, and professional rivalries. Authors with no conflicts to declare should include the statement "The authors declare no conflicts of interest" or equivalent.

Ex Scientia Cerebrosus does not verify conflict of interest disclosures and relies on author self-reporting. The editorial board has determined that the following do not constitute conflicts requiring disclosure:

• Payment of publication fees
• Prior publication in Ex Scientia Cerebrosus journals
• Personal friendships or past sexual encounters with editorial board members
• Having been referred by another author who received a referral discount
• Being named "Kevin" (though authors are encouraged to disclose this for statistical purposes)

Ex Scientia Cerebrosus takes plagiarism seriously. All submissions are checked for originality using industry-standard methods (editorial board members may, at their discretion, search for key phrases using available search engines).

Duplicate publication—submitting substantially similar work to multiple venues—is generally discouraged. However, we recognize that important findings often merit dissemination through multiple channels, and we defer to author judgment regarding when this is appropriate.

Ex Scientia Cerebrosus has established a formal process for addressing ethics complaints. We are committed to investigating all concerns thoroughly and fairly, with appropriate protections for all parties.

    ┌─────────────────────────────────────┐
    │  COMPLAINT RECEIVED                 │
    │  (Written, notarized, $50 fee)      │
    └──────────────┬──────────────────────┘
                   ▼
    ┌─────────────────────────────────────┐
    │  ACKNOWLEDGMENT SENT                │
    │  (6-8 weeks)                        │
    └──────────────┬──────────────────────┘
                   ▼
    ┌─────────────────────────────────────┐
    │  PRELIMINARY REVIEW                 │
    │  (Timeline varies)                  │
    └──────────────┬──────────────────────┘
                   ▼
         ┌────────┴────────┐
         ▼                 ▼
    ┌─────────┐      ┌───────────────────┐
    │ CLOSED: │      │ REFERRED TO       │
    │ Insuff. │      │ ETHICS COMMITTEE  │
    │ Evidence│      │ (Meets quarterly) │
    └─────────┘      └─────────┬─────────┘
                               ▼
                   ┌───────────────────────┐
                   │ INVESTIGATION         │
                   │ (6-18 months)         │
                   └───────────┬───────────┘
                               ▼
                   ┌───────────────────────┐
                   │ COMMITTEE FINDING     │
                   └───────────┬───────────┘
                               ▼
                      ┌───────┴───────┐
                      ▼               ▼
               ┌──────────┐    ┌──────────┐
               │ NO       │    │ CONCERN  │
               │ ACTION   │    │ UPHELD   │
               └──────────┘    └────┬─────┘
                                    ▼
                          ┌─────────────────┐
                          │ AUTHOR NOTIFIED │
                          │ (Response: 90   │
                          │ days to appeal) │
                          └────────┬────────┘
                                   ▼
                          ┌─────────────────┐
                          │ APPEAL REVIEWED │
                          │ BY ETHICS       │
                          │ COMMITTEE       │
                          └────────┬────────┘
                                   │
                          (Return to INVESTIGATION)
                

To file a complaint: Submit a written statement describing the concern, along with all supporting documentation, to the Ethics Committee via post. Complaints must be notarized and accompanied by a non-refundable processing fee of $50 USD (money order or cashier's check only). Electronic submissions are not accepted for security reasons.

📄 Download Ethics Complaint Form (PDF)

Complainant obligations: While a complaint is under review, complainants must not:

• Contact the accused party directly regarding the matter
• Discuss the complaint publicly, including online, at conferences, or in other publications
• Contact other journals or institutions about the same concern
• File a complaint with any other body until our process is complete
• Conduct independent investigation that might interfere with our process

Violation of these obligations may result in dismissal of the complaint.

The Ex Scientia Cerebrosus Ethics Committee is composed of independent experts in research ethics, editorial standards, financial management, and related fields. The Committee meets quarterly to review referred complaints, update policies, and address matters of publication integrity.

The Ethics Committee operates independently of the editorial board, in the sense that they hold separate meetings. Committee decisions are final, subject to the appeals process outlined above.

Ex Scientia Cerebrosus will issue corrections or retractions when errors or ethical violations are conclusively demonstrated through our investigation process. The following guidelines apply:

• Corrections: Minor errors that do not affect the conclusions may be addressed through a published correction notice, appended to the original article where technically feasible.
• Expressions of Concern: When an investigation is ongoing, we may publish an Expression of Concern alerting readers that questions have been raised. This does not imply any finding of wrongdoing.
• Retractions: Articles may be retracted when fundamental errors are identified, ethical violations are confirmed, or the author requests retraction for personal reasons we do not require them to disclose.

Retracted articles will remain available in the archive with a retraction notice, as we believe transparency serves the scholarly community. The original publication fee is non-refundable regardless of retraction status.

Ex Scientia Cerebrosus facilitates the dissemination of research but does not independently verify:

• The accuracy of reported data or statistical analyses
• The validity of research methodologies
• The soundness of conclusions drawn from presented evidence
• The existence of described phenomena, entities, or effects
• Compliance with applicable laws, regulations, or institutional policies
• The physical possibility of described experiments
• The ontological status of research subjects

Publication in Ex Scientia Cerebrosus does not constitute endorsement of any research methodology, finding, interpretation, theoretical framework, or claim regarding the nature of reality. Readers are encouraged to evaluate published work critically and reach their own conclusions.

Ex Scientia Cerebrosus is committed to the ongoing development of our ethics policies. Suggestions may be directed to the Ethics Committee, though we cannot guarantee a response.