Skip to main content

CALL FOR PAPERS!! We are now accepting submissions, and our editorial team will begin the review process starting June 1st.

The “Mental Note” Journal

Mental Note is now accepting submissions for this year’s issue. Mental Note is an Academic Journal dedicated to Cognitive Science, aimed at publishing undergraduate research. We are looking for college-level research papers and theoretical works pertaining to the Cognitive Sciences. We expect all submitted papers to follow the guidelines described below:

Overview: Mental Note does not accept full-length papers. Instead, we are looking for shorter submissions. Submissions should be no shorter than 1500 words, or about 3 pages single spaced, and no longer than 5000 words, or about 10 pages single spaced.

Eligible Work: You need not be an undergraduate to submit your work; however, submissions should include work that was mainly completed as an undergraduate student in Cognitive Science related fields. Research and papers done for classes, honors theses, and independent work are all welcome. Students must include a sponsoring statement from their faculty advisor to assure the quality of work and that all ethical considerations, if applicable, have been followed.

Submission Type: There are three types of submissions, empirical, theoretical, and commentary papers. The first two should focus on the impact of your research. For empirical work, methods should not be overly detailed, and there should be more emphasis on setting up the problem and the implications of your findings. The what, why, how, and impact of this work should be clear. Similarly, theoretical work should include a clear overview of what you are researching and the impact of your conclusions. This is to ensure both brevity and readability for people of all expertise.

The third option is submitting a commentary paper. Commentaries are not original research. Instead, they are responses to recent Cognitive Science research. Some events might elicit a particularly strong opinion or reaction. This is an opportunity to argue with the researcher’s methodology or results. The topic you choose to write about is something that you are knowledgeable in, as your commentary should largely be your informed opinion about the news event.

Click here to download the “Call for Papers” (PDF) (31 KB) 

The structure of submissions should be as follows:

  1. Title Page
  2. Abstract/Introduction: Papers should be prefaced with a short paragraph that introduces readers to the topic and to your research.
  3. Keywords
  4. Main Text: See below and overview of the 5 points that should be covered. Keep in mind, submissions should be short, and focus on the high level findings from your work.
  5. Sponsoring Statement
  6. References

 

Empirical Theoretical
What: your research topic What: your research topic
Why: the significance of your research topic Why: the significance of your research topic
How: the methods used in your research How: an analysis of your research topic
Findings: what results reveal Findings: what analysis reveals
Significance: a discussion of results and significance Significance: a discussion of findings and significance
Click here to download the Empirical Paper Template (.DOCX) (14 KB) Click here to download the Theoretical Paper Template (.DOCX) (14 KB)

The structure of submissions should be as follows:

  1. Summary: Quickly summarize the research that you are responding to. Some questions you may wish to discuss are: Was the research done at a university or by a corporation? How exactly does it relate to Cognitive Science?
  2. Main text: Give your commentary in a coherent fashion. The logical flow of your argument is extremely important. However, ensure that individuals of all levels of expertise will be able to appreciate your commentary by limiting your use of technical vocabulary. Keep in mind that submissions should be kept short.
  3. Conclusion: Briefly describe the contributions and importance of your work. Where do you think researchers should go from here? Discuss new possible avenues of research.
  4. References

Please only submit commentaries on research that occurred after May 2015, so as to maintain relevance. If possible, include a link to the article that you are responding to.

Given your commentary, briefly describe the contributions of your research work. Explain why it is important and where do you think researchers should go from here? Discuss new possible avenues of research.

Click here to download the Commentary Paper Template (.DOCX) (14 KB)


Initial Screening

The editor in chief will check for the following criteria before sending a paper through the review process:

  1. Topically relevant. If there is confusion about the topic’s relevance, it will be sent to peer reviewers
  2. Ethical standards are met
  3. Page/ word number requirements are met
  4. Work mainly completed within undergraduate years

Review

The review process will be a three tier process, involving undergraduates, graduate students, and faculty members. The article will first be reviewed by two to four undergraduates most well versed in that discipline. If the undergraduates decide that it is a paper of high quality, they will pass it on to a graduate student/graduate students to review. Finally, if the paper makes it through the graduate student tier, it will be passed on to faculty members for a final approval. The entire process will be double blind.

Articles that pass all three tiers will be considered fit for publishing. However, if there are any major requests for revisions, then an undergraduate reviewer and the author will work more closely to get the article to a higher level of quality.


Senior Editor-in-Chief

Dr. Sara Pixley – spixley@ruccs.rutgers.edu

Undergraduate Editor-in-Chief

Anmol Eswarapu – anmol.eswarapu@rutgers.edu

Senior Editor

Dr. Julien Musolino – julienm@ruccs.rutgers.edu

Graduate Editors

Malihe Alikhani – malihe.alikhani@rutgers.edu

Serena De Stefani – serena.destefani@rutgers.edu

Elif Nur Poyraz – elif.poyraz@rutgers.edu

Naama Avshalom – naama.avshalom@rutgers.edu

Undergraduate Editors

Yoni Friedman – j.friedman@rutgers.edu

Amanda Evers – a.evers@rutgers.edu

Grace Chung – grace.chung527@gmail.com

Isabella Napoletano – im6@scarletmail.rutgers.edu

Jenna Gannon – jmg605@scarletmail.rutgers.edu

Jonas Hernandez – jgh90@scarletmail.rutgers.edu

Justin Huh – huh.justin@gmail.com

Maria Xu – mx69@scarletmail.rutgers.edu

Peter Tilton – petertilton@gmail.com

Pranav Prakash – pp618@scarletmail.rutgers.edu

Rachel Trischetta – rat84@scarletmail.rutgers.edu

Rangaraj Tirumala – rrt@scarletmail.rutgers.edu

Sheldon Zhang – zz249@scarletmail.rutgers.edu