Submissions

Author Guidelines

Journal of Anomalous Phenomena (JAP) — Scientific Investigation of UAP and Related Phenomena — welcomes original, rigorous, and scientifically significant contributions investigating unidentified anomalous phenomena, underwater anomalies (USO), transmedium events, ionospheric perturbations, sensor artifacts, and related frontier observations across all scientific disciplines.

The journal is inherently interdisciplinary and provides a scholarly forum for research connecting the natural sciences, engineering, data science, artificial intelligence, psychology, sociology, history, philosophy of science, and related fields.

JAP is particularly interested in research that would otherwise remain unpublished because it challenges conventional explanations, documents anomalies without forced conclusions, reports null or inconclusive findings, or fails to replicate previous results — yet is methodologically sound and scientifically informative.

The journal does not consider perceived novelty, "impact," or statistical significance as criteria for acceptance. Manuscripts are evaluated on methodological soundness, ethical conduct, clarity of reporting, and contribution to the scientific record. A well-conducted anomaly investigation that ends with "we do not know" is a contribution to science, not a failure of it.

JAP welcomes submissions across the natural sciences, engineering, data science, artificial intelligence, social sciences, and humanities, including interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary work.

The journal publishes:

• Anomaly Reports — detailed documentation of unidentified phenomena without forced explanation

• Null and Inconclusive Results — studies that fail to confirm a hypothesis but remain scientifically informative

• Failed Replications — attempts to reproduce previous UAP or anomaly findings that did not succeed

• Abandoned Hypotheses — analyses of why a proposed explanation did not hold

• Transmedium and USO Investigations — air-water-space transition phenomena and underwater anomalies

• Sensor Artifact Studies — forensic analysis of false positives, calibration drifts, and instrumental anomalies

• Ionospheric and Atmospheric Anomalies — TLEs, plasma perturbations, radar refraction anomalies

• Data Notes — datasets of limited immediate use that may still benefit the community

• Publication-Bias and Meta-Research — studies quantifying the file drawer problem in anomaly research

• Theoretical and Philosophical Explorations — epistemological, ontological, and ethical dimensions of anomaly research

• Historical and Archival Analyses — re-examination of past cases with modern analytical tools

• Methodology and Instrumentation Papers — new sensor systems, detection algorithms, and analytical frameworks

No article type exceeds 8,000 words (excluding references, tables, figures, and supplementary materials).

Article Processing Charges (APCs)

Journal of Anomalous Phenomena is a Diamond Open Access journal. No Article Processing Charges (APCs) and no submission fees are charged.

JAP is published by AnKa Publisher under a Diamond Open Access model: neither authors nor readers pay any fees. There are no submission fees, no article processing charges, no page charges, no colour charges, and no subscription fees of any kind.

The journal's primary support comes from its publisher, AnKa Publisher, which provides publishing infrastructure, DOI registration, ISSN maintenance, technical support, and editorial coordination. Supplementary support from institutions, libraries, funders, and donors is accepted where it aligns with the journal's mission and independence, and is disclosed transparently in the journal's annual report.

All articles are published under a CC BY 4.0 licence, and authors retain copyright.

1. Submission of Manuscripts — Preparation of Articles

Authors are strongly encouraged to carefully follow the guidelines outlined in this document when preparing their manuscripts.

A well-structured manuscript should clearly establish the research context, identify the specific gap or unresolved question, and explicitly state the contribution of the study. Adherence to these guidelines will enhance the clarity, coherence, and academic quality of submissions, and is essential for maintaining the standards of the journal.

Mandatory Article Template

All articles submitted to Journal of Anomalous Phenomena must be prepared using the official template provided below. Articles not using this template may not be accepted for the review stage. Please also use this template file when uploading your manuscript to the online submission system.

Important Notes

• Mandatory Template JAP: All manuscripts must be prepared according to the official template provided.

• All Sections: The title, author information, abstract, keywords, headings, text, references, and all other sections must strictly adhere to the rules and formatting (font, point size, style, alignment, etc.) specified in the template.

• Submission Process: You must upload your manuscript to the online submission system formatted according to the required template.

DOWNLOAD JAP ARTICLE TEMPLATE

Articles should be comprehensive, fully documented reports of original research. They should be concise but with complete results and conclusions. Authors are encouraged to take advantage of the Web features available (including 3D animations, video and sound).

Manuscripts should be divided into the following sections: Title page, Abstract, Introduction, Materials and methods, Results and discussion, Conclusion and outlook, Acknowledgments, Abbreviations list, References.

2. Types of Articles

JAP accepts several types of scholarly contributions. The structure and length of a manuscript should be appropriate to its article type. No article type exceeds 8,000 words (excluding references, tables, figures, and supplementary materials).

Original Research Articles

Original Research Articles present methodologically sound empirical, experimental, computational, or interdisciplinary research on unidentified anomalous phenomena, underwater anomalies, transmedium events, ionospheric perturbations, or related frontier observations. They should contain a clearly defined research question or hypothesis, an appropriate methodology, results, and a scientifically supported interpretation of the findings — including explicit acknowledgment of what remains unexplained.

Anomaly Reports

Anomaly Reports provide detailed documentation of unexplained phenomena without forced explanation. These papers follow a structured format: Observation, Elimination of conventional explanations, Uncertainty, and Open Questions. They are among the most valuable contributions to the scientific record.

Failed Replication Articles

Failed Replication Articles report direct or conceptual replication attempts of previous UAP or anomaly findings that did not succeed. They should summarise the original study, detail the replication methods, and discuss possible reasons for the discrepancy.

Registered Reports

Registered Reports present pre-registered studies in which the introduction, hypotheses, and methods (Stage 1) are peer reviewed and can receive in-principle acceptance before the results exist. This removes outcome-based bias from the editorial decision entirely. Stage 2 reports the results and discussion.

Brief Reports

Brief Reports present concise but significant anomaly observations, null findings, or methodological notes that warrant dissemination in a shorter format.

Data Notes

Data Notes describe datasets of limited immediate use that may nonetheless benefit the community, including "dark data" from sensor networks, radar archives, or historical case files that would otherwise remain unpublished.

Methodology and Instrumentation Papers

Methodology and Instrumentation Papers describe new instruments, sensor systems, calibration methods, detection algorithms, or data-processing pipelines relevant to anomaly detection and analysis. These papers must include sufficient technical detail for independent replication.

Meta-Research Articles

Meta-Research Articles provide quantitative or qualitative analyses of publication bias, reproducibility, research waste, or the file drawer problem in anomaly research itself, including meta-analyses, funnel-plot analyses, and p-curve analyses.

Case Reports and Case Series

Case Reports and Case Series present detailed documentation and analysis of individual UAP events or clusters of related events. These articles must include complete sensor data, witness testimony (anonymized where necessary), and rigorous elimination of conventional explanations.

Theoretical and Conceptual Papers

Theoretical and Conceptual Papers present new theoretical frameworks, philosophical analyses, or conceptual models relevant to anomaly research. These papers must be grounded in existing literature and generate testable predictions where possible.

Historical and Archival Analyses

Historical and Archival Analyses examine historical records, archival documents, and past cases of UAP and related phenomena. This domain enables the re-evaluation of past observations with modern analytical tools.

Commentaries

Commentaries provide focused scholarly discussion of important scientific, methodological, or conceptual issues, including discussion of articles previously published in the journal.

Perspectives

Perspective articles provide scientifically grounded and forward-looking discussions of important developments, unresolved questions, emerging concepts, or future directions in anomaly research and research culture.

Letters to the Editor

Letters may address scientific, methodological, theoretical, or editorial issues relevant to the journal and may comment constructively on previously published work.

Editorials

Editorials are invited commentaries by the Editor-in-Chief or guest editors, typically tied to a special issue or journal development.

Special Issue Articles

Special Issue Articles are submitted to a themed special issue and follow the same standards as regular submissions, with theme-specific framing.

3. Article Preparation and Writing Style

All manuscripts must be prepared using the official JAP Article Template.

Manuscripts should be written in clear, precise, concise, and professional academic English. Because JAP addresses an interdisciplinary scientific community, authors should write for readers who may not share the terminology or methodological conventions of their particular field.

Specialized terminology should be defined when necessary. Unnecessary jargon, excessive abbreviations, rhetorical language, and unnecessarily complex sentences should be avoided.

Authors should carefully distinguish between established evidence, empirical observation, interpretation, hypothesis, and speculation. This distinction is particularly important for manuscripts concerning anomalous phenomena, which may be misinterpreted as pseudoscience.

Theoretical possibilities should not be presented as established facts. Claims concerning the nature, origin, or behavior of anomalous phenomena should be supported by appropriate evidence or clearly identified as theoretical propositions.

JAP encourages a writing style that is analytical rather than promotional, scientifically cautious rather than speculative, and conceptually ambitious without exceeding the available evidence.

---

4. General Structure of Articles

The structure of the manuscript should reflect its article type.

Original Research Articles will generally include:

Title → Author Information → Abstract → Keywords → Introduction → Background/Literature Review → Methods → Results → Discussion → Limitations → Conclusion → Acknowledgments → Funding → Conflict of Interest → Data Availability → References

The structure may be adapted when required by the nature of the research. Computational, theoretical, philosophical, clinical, or mixed-methods studies may require different section arrangements.

Theoretical, conceptual, review, perspective, and hypothesis articles may use a more flexible structure, provided that the argument develops logically and the major sections are clearly identified.

5. Title

The title should be concise, informative, and accurately represent the central subject and contribution of the manuscript.

Authors should avoid unnecessarily long titles, unexplained abbreviations, vague terminology, and claims that exceed the evidence presented.

Because titles are used for indexing and information retrieval, important scientific concepts should be included where appropriate.

For manuscripts addressing anomalous phenomena, the title should distinguish between demonstrated observation and theoretical interpretation.

6. Authors and Affiliations

All authors should be listed in the order agreed upon by the authors.

Each author's institutional affiliation should include the relevant department or research unit, institution, city, and country.

The corresponding author should be clearly identified and should provide a valid professional email address.

Authors are strongly encouraged to provide an ORCID iD.

Only individuals who satisfy accepted authorship criteria should be listed as authors. Other contributors may be acknowledged separately.

7. Abstract

Every manuscript must include an abstract.

For Original Research Articles, the abstract should generally include: Background/Objective, Methods, Results, and Conclusion.

For theoretical, conceptual, review, hypothesis, perspective, and commentary articles, an unstructured abstract may be used.

The abstract should accurately represent the content and contribution of the manuscript and should be understandable independently of the main text.

References should generally not be included in the abstract. Unexplained abbreviations and unsupported claims should be avoided.

8. Keywords

Authors should provide 4–8 keywords following the abstract.

Keywords should represent the principal concepts, phenomena, systems, or methods discussed in the manuscript and should use established scientific terminology where possible.

Examples include:

UAP, unidentified anomalous phenomena, USO, transmedium phenomena, ionospheric anomalies, sensor artifacts, radar anomalies, electro-optical data, infrared signatures, anomaly detection, machine learning, Bayesian inference, publication bias, file drawer problem, reproducibility, open science, Registered Reports, meta-research, methodological failure, dark data.

9. Introduction

The Introduction should establish the scientific or conceptual context of the manuscript and explain why the research problem is important.

It should identify the relevant knowledge gap or unresolved problem and clearly state the research question, hypothesis, objective, or theoretical proposition.

The Introduction should explain how the manuscript contributes to the broader scientific discussion concerning unidentified anomalous phenomena and related frontier observations.

It should provide sufficient background to establish the rationale for the study without becoming an exhaustive review of the literature.

10. Literature Review and Background

The literature should be reviewed critically and in direct relation to the research question.

Authors should synthesise previous research rather than simply list publications. Important theoretical disagreements, methodological limitations, contradictory findings, and unresolved questions should be identified where relevant.

Because JAP is interdisciplinary, authors are encouraged to integrate relevant literature across disciplines rather than treating fields as isolated domains.

When introducing concepts such as UAP, USO, transmedium phenomena, sensor artifacts, or methodological failure, authors should clearly distinguish established evidence from conceptual interpretation.

11. Methods

The Methods section should provide sufficient information for the research to be evaluated and, where feasible, reproduced.

Depending on the study, this may include research design, participants, datasets, materials, experimental procedures, computational models, algorithms, model architecture, training procedures, software, statistical analyses, and evaluation methods.

For studies involving human participants, witness testimony, clinical data, or other sensitive materials, appropriate information concerning ethical approval, informed consent, participant protection, and relevant institutional requirements must be provided.

12. Results

The Results section should present the findings clearly, objectively, and logically.

Tables and figures should be used when they improve clarity and should complement rather than unnecessarily repeat the main text.

Statistical analyses should be reported using appropriate methods and sufficient information should be provided to allow readers to evaluate the findings.

For anomalous observations and null results, appropriate reporting of effect sizes, confidence intervals, power analyses, and equivalence tests should be included where relevant.

Interpretation of the broader meaning of the findings should generally be reserved for the Discussion.

13. Discussion

The Discussion should interpret the findings in relation to the research question, theoretical framework, and existing literature.

Authors should explain how their findings support, modify, challenge, or contradict previous research.

The broader implications for the field, for meta-analyses, for research waste, and for the scientific record may be discussed where appropriate.

Authors should clearly distinguish conclusions directly supported by the findings from broader theoretical interpretations.

Where findings may have multiple explanations, alternative interpretations should be acknowledged.

14. Limitations

Authors should explicitly discuss the principal limitations of their research.

Limitations may involve study design, sample size, datasets, methodology, measurement, computational constraints, theoretical assumptions, generalizability, or other relevant factors.

Research concerning anomalous phenomena may involve additional limitations because the absence of an explanation may be due to insufficient data, sensor limitations, or other factors. Acknowledging such limitations is an important component of rigorous scientific reporting.

15. Conclusion

The Conclusion should summarize the principal contribution of the manuscript and explain its broader scientific significance.

It should not simply repeat the Results.

Authors may identify unresolved questions and future research directions, particularly where the findings open new questions concerning the phenomenon under study or the methods used.

JAP particularly encourages conclusions that recognise uncertainty rather than presenting premature certainty about the nature or origin of an anomaly.

16. Figures and Tables

Figures and tables should be numbered consecutively and cited in the manuscript.

Each figure should have an informative caption, and each table should have a concise and descriptive title.

Figures should be submitted in an appropriate high-resolution format. Tables should preferably remain editable and should not be submitted solely as images.

Authors are responsible for obtaining permission for copyrighted material reproduced from other sources.

17. Supplementary Materials

Supplementary materials may include datasets, source code, computational notebooks, extended analyses, additional figures, experimental materials, questionnaires, model specifications, or other resources supporting the manuscript.

Where appropriate, authors are strongly encouraged to make data and code available through recognized repositories.

If supporting materials cannot be shared because of privacy, ethical, legal, security, or proprietary restrictions, authors should clearly state the reason.

18. Research Transparency and Reproducibility

JAP encourages transparent and reproducible research.

Authors should provide sufficient methodological information to enable independent scientific evaluation.

For computational and AI studies, transparency regarding datasets, model versions, training procedures, evaluation protocols, computational environments, and relevant parameters is strongly encouraged.

Where complete reproducibility is not possible, authors should clearly identify the relevant limitations.

19. Ethical Considerations

Research involving human participants, witness testimony, clinical populations, personal information, biological materials, or other sensitive data must comply with applicable ethical standards and institutional requirements.

Where applicable, authors must report ethics committee or institutional review board approval and informed consent procedures.

Special care must be taken with military personnel, government employees, and individuals in vulnerable situations. JAP follows the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and relevant national and international regulations.

20. Artificial Intelligence Used in Research

When AI systems are used as research instruments, authors should clearly describe their role in the study.

Where relevant, manuscripts should identify the AI system, model, version, architecture, computational environment, or platform and provide sufficient methodological information for readers to understand how it contributed to the research.

Where commercially provided AI systems cannot be fully described, authors should report the information available to them and acknowledge limitations affecting reproducibility.

21. Generative AI in Manuscript Preparation

Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and scholarly content of their manuscripts.

Generative AI tools may be used for limited purposes such as language assistance, translation, formatting, coding support, or other editorial tasks, provided that authors retain full responsibility for the final manuscript.

AI systems must not be listed as authors.

Where generative AI has been used substantially in the generation or modification of text, figures, code, analyses, or other scholarly content, its use should be disclosed according to the journal's applicable policy.

Authors must carefully verify AI-assisted material for factual errors, fabricated references, inappropriate citations, bias, and other inaccuracies.

22. References and Citation Style

JAP uses an author–date citation system.

In-text citations should generally follow the form:

(Smith, 2025)

For two authors:

(Smith & Jones, 2025)

For three or more authors:

(Smith et al., 2025)

Multiple references may be cited together:

(Brown, 2024; Smith et al., 2025; Williams & Lee, 2026)

Direct quotations should include page numbers where applicable.

The reference list should contain only works cited in the manuscript and should be arranged alphabetically according to the surname of the first author.

Authors should provide DOI information whenever available and should verify the accuracy and completeness of all references.

23. Authorship, Funding, and Conflict of Interest

All listed authors must have made a substantial contribution to the research and must approve the final manuscript.

Funding sources should be disclosed, including grant or award numbers where applicable.

Authors must disclose financial, institutional, professional, personal, or other relationships that could reasonably be perceived as influencing the research.

If no relevant conflicts exist, an explicit statement should be provided.

24. Data Availability Statement

Manuscripts reporting empirical or computational research should include a Data Availability Statement where applicable.

Authors should indicate whether the supporting data are publicly available, available upon reasonable request, subject to restrictions, or unavailable.

Where possible, datasets, source code, computational notebooks, and other reproducibility materials should be deposited in appropriate repositories.

25. Originality and Prior Publication

Submitted manuscripts must be original.

The manuscript must not normally have been published previously in substantially the same form and should not be under simultaneous consideration by another journal.

All sources must be appropriately cited, and authors are responsible for identifying substantial overlap with previous publications.

Preprints may be considered where consistent with journal policy, provided their existence is disclosed during submission.

26. Peer Review

JAP uses open peer review for manuscripts selected for external evaluation.

All submissions first undergo editorial assessment for scope, methodological soundness, and compliance with journal policies. Every submission also undergoes a 48-hour AI-assisted pre-check for plagiarism, statistical consistency, data integrity, ethical compliance, and reporting-standard compliance.

Manuscripts considered appropriate for external review are evaluated by independent experts with relevant expertise. Because of the interdisciplinary nature of JAP, manuscripts may be reviewed by experts from multiple disciplines when appropriate.

Reviewers are required to state explicitly why an anomaly report or null result is scientifically meaningful. Rejection on the grounds of "lack of interest" alone is not permitted. Rejection must be justified on methodological or ethical grounds.

Following peer review, the editorial team may accept the manuscript, request revision, or reject it. A request for revision does not guarantee acceptance.

After publication, articles remain open for post-publication community review for 90 days. The most valuable contributions receive a DOI and a "Community Endorsement" label.

27. Revised Manuscripts

When a manuscript is returned for revision, authors should submit a revised version together with a point-by-point response to the reviewers' comments.

The response should explain clearly how each substantive comment has been addressed. Where the authors disagree with a reviewer recommendation, they should provide a reasoned scientific explanation.

Major revisions may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation.

28. Final Note to Authors

JAP welcomes research that does not necessarily fit within a single established disciplinary category.

The journal is particularly interested in work that identifies new questions, unexpected anomalies, methodological boundaries, theoretical tensions, and previously unrecognised patterns across the scientific record.

Authors are encouraged to approach unidentified anomalous phenomena without assuming that "unexplained" means "unexplainable."

An anomaly report may document a genuine physical phenomenon, constrain the boundary conditions of a theory, reveal a sensor artifact, prevent wasted effort, or redirect a field toward more productive questions. These outcomes may prove informative, corrective, clarifying, or otherwise consequential.

The journal therefore does not seek to determine in advance what an anomaly will mean.

JAP seeks to provide a rigorous scientific forum for investigating how science learns from what resists explanation.

From Anomaly to Knowledge.
From Null to Informative.
From Absence to Evidence.
From the File Drawer to the Record.