Amidst a revolutionary surge in psychedelic research, Psychedelics sets out precisely to pioneer and consolidate the scientific understanding of psychedelic substances. We are committed to publishing high-caliber, rigorous research that explores the biological, clinical, psychological, and societal dimensions of psychedelics. We intend to catalyze and shape the psychedelic renaissance by fostering international collaboration, bridging disciplinary divides, and influencing policy and practice with evidence-based findings. As a platform in this burgeoning field, we aim to propel the dialogue and discovery surrounding psychedelics into uncharted territories, illuminating their profound potential and role in our society. Join us as we chart the course towards a psychedelic-informed future.

Psychedelics holds a panoramic lens in a field as vast and multi-dimensional as psychedelic research. Our scope is comprehensive, encompassing the full spectrum of psychedelic inquiry. From molecular mechanisms to therapeutic applications, historical insights to societal implications, we are committed to providing a forum for diverse voices and perspectives that inform our understanding of these potent compounds.

We invite submissions from all disciplines, embracing a broad spectrum of research methodologies. We are interested in fundamental neuroscience, biochemistry, pharmacodynamics, clinical studies, brain imaging, therapeutic interventions, psychological explorations of perception and consciousness, and sociological examinations of historical usage and cultural impact.

Our scope is as broad as the field itself. We aim to shed light on the profound complexity and potential of psychedelic substances as we generate a comprehensive repository of psychedelic knowledge. Join us as we traverse the innovative landscape of psychedelic science, charting the unknown and illuminating the future of this exciting field.

New insights into the mind and therapeutic potential of these remarkable compounds are being gained thanks to the psychedelic renaissance. As the first dedicated platform in this burgeoning field, the mission of Psychedelics is fourfold:

• Promote Rigorous Research: Psychedelics aims to become a beacon for the rigorous and robust scientific exploration of psychedelic substances. We welcome experimental and observational studies, reviews, and meta-analyses that dissect psychedelics’ biochemistry, pharmacodynamics, therapeutic potential, and other material that can advance the field.

• Bridge Disciplinary Boundaries: We aim to unite disparate disciplines by publishing cross-disciplinary research that connects molecular understanding with clinical, psychological, societal, and historical perspectives of psychedelic substances.

• Foster Collaboration: As pioneers in the field, we are committed to fostering an international, collaborative community of researchers, clinicians, policymakers, and stakeholders. We aim to spark lively discourse, encourage knowledge sharing, and facilitate synergies.

• Influence Policy and Practice: Our journal aspires to document the psychedelic revolution and shape it. By presenting clear, evidence-based findings, we aim to influence medical, legal, and societal perspectives towards psychedelics, ultimately leading to more informed policy and practice.

As we navigate these exciting and uncharted waters, we invite you to join us in our quest to understand the mysteries of psychedelics, their transformative potential, and their place in our society. Together, let us illuminate the path to a psychedelic-informed future.

At the heart of Psychedelics reside our unwavering core values: academic integrity, scientific rigor, passionate purpose, relentless innovation, inclusive and cross-disciplinary team science, and excellence. We serve as a global platform that celebrates the diverse tapestry of psychedelic research, welcoming contributions from every corner of the globe. Each manuscript that comes to us is evaluated solely on its merit and potential contribution to the field, unswayed by its geographical origin. In fostering this culture of fairness and respect, we strive to create a dynamic, equitable space that fuels the collective growth and understanding of psychedelics as a tool to better health.

Our major goal is to attain the highest levels of scientific achievement and that can only be based on transparency and honesty. Therefore, as an integral part of our mission to uphold the bedrock of scientific integrity, Genomic Press has instituted procedures to meticulously scrutinize any allegations that come into our purview, irrespective of their channel of emergence. Whether raised prior to publication or post-release, or when proffered by whistleblowers, these charges are met with rigorous examination. Our pledge to sustain scholarly excellence propels us to diligently investigate any suspicions of scientific malfeasance, which may run the gamut from academic fraud, recurrent manuscript submissions, spurious data creation or manipulation, to ethically dubious research participant interactions, contested authorship, falsified reviewer endorsements, and cloaked vested interests.

In this spirit all our papers will be subjected to plagiarism check for text and, as the technology evolves, also for figures.

While our operational ethos is chiefly harmonized with the principles articulated by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), we retain the latitude to embark on divergent strategies when exigent circumstances call for such. This latitude may entail establishing a dialogue with the questioned authors’ academic institutions, funding agencies, or other germane oversight authorities for rigorous scrutiny.

As for amending the published record, we employ a contextually-based approach, executing modifications through either errata or retractions, based upon broad considerations: errata typically correct inadvertent errors in discrete aspects of published work that do not change the overall findings and conclusions. In contrast, the criteria for retraction may include any of the following: (a) evidence of calculated manipulation, (b) the level of correction would change the nature of the overall findings and conclusions, (c) extensive plagiarism, or (d) there is an overall lack of confidence in the work. We also support COPE’s observations that Editors consider retracting a publication if:

• They have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of major error (eg, miscalculation or experimental error), or as a result of fabrication (eg, of data) or falsification (e.g., image manipulation).
• It constitutes plagiarism.
• The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper attribution to previous sources or disclosure to the editor, permission to republish, or justification (ie, cases of redundant publication).
• It contains material or data without authorization for use.
• Copyright has been infringed or there is some other serious legal issue (e.g., libel, privacy).
• It reports unethical research.
• It has been published solely on the basis of a compromised or manipulated peer review process.
• The author(s) failed to disclose a major competing interest (a.k.a. conflict of interest) that, in the view of the editor, would have unduly affected interpretations of the work or recommendations by editors and peer reviewers.

When deliberating on rescinding an article’s acceptance, initiating the retraction of an already disseminated piece, or emitting an editorial cautionary note, it is our standard protocol to engage in communications with the concerned authors’ institutions as part of our procedures. As supporters of COPE’s policies, we adhere to COPE guidelines in managing investigations of possible misconduct, which are accessible here). This document includes the following language “The COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors (Clause 11.4) notes that, in cases of suspected or alleged research or publication misconduct ‘editors should first seek a response from those suspected of misconduct. If they are not satisfied with the response, they should ask the relevant employers, or institution … to investigate.’ COPE therefore advises that investigations into possible misconduct should generally be undertaken by the researcher’s institution and not by editors. If a journal has published unreliable or fraudulent information, the editor has a duty to correct or retract this. However, responsibility for disciplining researchers and ensuring they do not commit further misconduct lies with their institution / employer. Therefore, even when faced with apparently strong evidence of misconduct (e.g. plagiarism or inappropriate image manipulation), and a clear need to correct the published record, editors should liaise with institutions and ensure they are informed.”

Peer review is the cornerstone of the scientific evaluation process, and it is widely used in evaluating research funding (grants) and research results (papers). We firmly believe in the integrity of the editorial process that is based on impartial peer review.

The peer review process can be configured in different ways, with the vast majority of journals worldwide adhering to one of three formats: (i) Single-blind peer reviews are anonymous only to the authors. Authors do not know the reviewers’ names or backgrounds, but reviewers know theirs. (ii) Both authors and reviewers in double-blind peer reviews are anonymous; only the editor knows their identities. A truly double-blind peer review process is hard to attain, as a knowledgeable review can infer authorship based on specific methods and areas of research and cited work. (iii) In open peer review the identity of the author and the reviewer is known by all participants, during or after the review process.

Psychedelics adheres to the single-blind peer review model, ensuring that authors do not know who the reviewers are. In contrast, reviewers have access to the authors’ identities. The single-blind anonymity allows reviewers to be honest without fear of criticism from an author; furthermore, knowing who the authors are allows the reviewer to use their knowledge of the authors’ previous research. This traditional and widely adopted format is the most prevalent in scientific publishing. This is also the same process used by most government funding agencies worldwide.

The content of Psychedelics will be entirely peer-reviewed. The only exception will be informational editorials, written by the Editor-in-Chief as broad and topical commentaries, and those will be clearly identified as Editorials.

All content submitted to Psychedelics, including original research, reviews, correspondence, and all other manuscript types, will be – without exception – sent by our editorial office to outside experts for single-blind peer review. To maintain the international makeup of Psychedelics from the outset, we typically send each submission to eight experts, inviting experts in such a manner that avoids all reviewers being in any one country. We aim to make editorial decisions based on at least three reviews, but if only two reviews are obtained, we may use them for an editorial decision.

Publishing with Psychedelics offers a distinct blend of benefits designed to champion your research and its impact. We guarantee a swift, meticulous, and personalized review process, ensuring your work is treated with the care and attention it deserves. Our commitment to global dissemination translates into a wide-reaching audience for your work, propelled further by our comprehensive press release strategy, providing worldwide access and visibility. In alignment with our dedication to equity and accessibility, we maintain a fair and transparent cost structure. our dedicated yet expansive focus on emerging research across multiple areas ensures your work will contribute to and thrive within the forefront of psychedelic science. Choose Psychedelics, where every piece of research is a step towards pioneering the future of psychedelic pharmacology and related sciences.

We are now registered with Crossref, providing all our publications with searchable DOI links. Applications are being made for Brain Medicine’s ISSN and E-ISSN. As a new and academically based and focused publication, we strive to build a robust portfolio of published articles to meet the criteria for inclusion in other databases. Upon reaching the minimum thresholds, our mission is to actively pursue indexing by prominent databases such as Emerging Sources Citation Index, Web of Science, Current Contents, Current Contents/Life Sciences, EMBASE/Excerpta Medica, MEDLINE/Index Medicus, Neuroscience Citation Index, PsycINFO, and Science Citation Index. Importantly, inclusion in these databases is retrospective. Consequently, even if your paper is submitted before our indexing, once achieved, your work will be indexed and electronically accessible through these databases.