What We Publish
Research Articles
Research Articles present the results of original research that address a clearly defined research question and contribute to the body of academic knowledge.
PLOS Climate considers Research Articles across all aspects of climate-related patterns, processes, impacts and solutions, including but not limited to earth, ocean and atmospheric science; palaeoclimatology; climate-smart energy and engineering; adaptation; mitigation; climate economics; social and health impacts of climate change; policy and governance; ethics and philosophy; and climate-related behavior and psychology.
In keeping with our mission to publish all methodologically and ethically rigorous research, we will consider Research Articles reporting negative and null results.
Research Articles typically consist of the following headings:
- Abstract
- Introduction
- Materials and Methods
- Results
- Discussion
- Conclusions
Submitted Research Articles are evaluated against the PLOS Climate criteria for publication and should also adhere to the author submission guidelines.
Articles reporting new methods
PLOS Climate considers Research Article submissions which report new methods, software, databases and tools as the primary focus of the article. These should also adhere to the utility, availability and validation criteria in the guidelines for specific study types.
Commissioned Article Types
PLOS Climate does not consider unsolicited submissions of the article types below - these articles must be commissioned or invited by the PLOS Climate editors, or, in the case of Collection Reviews and Collection Overviews, by Guest Editors of Collection partners.
Formal Comments
Formal Comments are invited by PLOS Climate editors to promote scientific discourse about PLOS Climate articles. They provide additional perspectives or context on a publication, especially in areas of policy, societal relevance, or ongoing scientific debate.
PLOS Climate may invite a Formal Comment as:
- A response to scientific criticism or re-analysis by authors whose work is disputed in a PLOS Climate publication.
- An article that offers an expert, broad and balanced perspective on a PLOS Climate publication, or adds context on the potential editorial, societal or policy implications of the findings.
Formal Comments should be concise, coherent, well-argued and of timely relevance to the field. Formal Comments undergo peer review, and the journal may also invite the authors of the article under discussion to provide a signed review or to submit a response to the Formal Comment. PLOS Climate editors do not consider unsolicited Formal Comments.
Formal Comments are not meant to address concerns around publication ethics. Direct ethics concerns about PLOS Climate to the PLOS Publication Ethics team and cc the journal.
Reviews
These peer-reviewed articles are compelling narrative reviews that discuss current developments in a particular field within the journal’s scope and draw meaningful conclusions adding to knowledge in the field. They should be balanced, coherent, and representative of the literature on the topic covered. These articles should be around 4,000 words with a recommended 5 figures and a suggested limit of 100 references.
Reviews should include:
- An introduction summarizing the topic’s background and purpose of the review.
- A conclusion succinctly outlining key points.
- Where possible, discussion of implications to the field and recommendations based on evidence presented.
Opinions
Opinion articles provide experts with a forum to comment on topical or controversial issues of broad interest. They address issues at the interface between science and policy or science and society, present a policy position aimed at influencing policy decisions, and examine and make recommendations on scientific and publishing practices. These are meant to be short, opinionated pieces. These articles should be no more than 1,000 words with a figure encouraged and a maximum of 15 references. Opinion articles are not routinely peer reviewed, but are evaluated in detail by the editors, who may decide to seek additional advice from members of the editorial board or external reviewers.
Essays
Essays are opinionated articles on a topic of interest to scientists and to a broader audience, including the general public. Unlike traditional review articles, which include a comprehensive account of a field, Essays take an imaginative approach to a provocative question, with an engaging but rigorous investigation of the problem. We encourage authors of Essays to select the most representative references to convey their points and avoid exhaustively covering the relevant literature.
The remit of Essays is very broad. They might:
- take stock of progress in a field from a personal point of view
- explore the implications of recent advances that promise to have broad-ranging consequences on a field
- comment on a topical or controversial area of research
- discuss key ideas or educational strategies to enhance understanding of fundamental questions
- offer historical/philosophical reflections on contemporary research
- analyze scientific issues with policy implications
Our Essays aim to engage a broad and diverse audience – it is therefore important to ensure that they are written in an accessible, semi-journalistic style that captures the interest of both specialists and non-specialist readers. We encourage the use of figures to illustrate key concepts in an informative, easy to grasp manner; as well as the use of text boxes for background, self-contained information.
Editorials
Editorials are written in-house by members of the editorial staff or by members of the Editorial Board.
Post-Publication Notices
PLOS publishes Editorial Notes, Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retraction notices, as needed, to address issues that arise after a PLOS article has been published.