Submissions

Login or Register to make a submission.

Submission Preparation Checklist

As part of the submission process, authors are required to check off their submission's compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.
  • The submission has not been previously published in peer-reviewed journals, nor is it submitted for consideration. In case the manuscript derives from earlier works (e.g. conference presentations, reports or academic theses), it is stated so in the ‘Acknowledgements’ section.
  • The submitter has received approval from all the authors for the submission of the manuscript in its current shape.
  • The manuscript is written in English and has been checked for language issues (spelling, grammer, vocabulary use).
  • The manuscript contains ‘About authors’ section.
  • The manuscript contains ‘CRediT contribution statement’.
  • The manuscript contains ‘Declaration of competing interests’.
  • The manuscript contains ‘Declaration of generative AI use in writing’.
  • The manuscript contains ‘Ethics statement’.
  • The manuscript contains ‘Funding’ section.
  • Where available, DOI/URL links are provided for the referenced sources.

Author Guidelines

The detailed author instructions can be found here.

Research article

This is the most classical format of a scientific publication. It requires a clearly stated research problem, transparent description of the methods used to address it, presentation of the data and analysis results, discussion and conclusions sections.

Research articles are always sent to external reviewers (peer scientists with the competence in the related areas).

Review

A review provides a critical account on what has been published (or done) by others. It is important that the review itself is a source of new knowledge—it could be summary of pros and cons of methods currently in use, identification of knowledge gaps, examples of real-world cases that are not underpinned by results from literature, directions for future work, etc. A good review usually focuses on a limited topic, avoids tedious retelling of the literature in a ‘laundry list’ format, adheres to objective and balanced writing, involves critical analysis and avoids simplistic conclusions. We strongly recommend the authors to critically check their work against the best practices in writing reviews (e.g. here and here) before submitting their work.

Review articles are sent to external reviewers.

Short communication

Short communication is a professional narrative presenting an innovative hypothesis or early findings when the available data does not allow to develop it into a full-scale research article.

Short communication articles are peer-reviewed, however the reviewers are informed about the paper format and that the expectations are slightly different.

Case report

Case report presents specific case related to introduction of an innovative traffic safety measure, observation of previously unknown or understudied risk factor, accident of an unusual scenario, etc. that can be of interest to the wide scientific audience.

Case reports are reviewed by the handling editor who also takes the final decision on whether the case is sufficiently interesting for publication.

Position paper

Position paper is a short essay in which an expert (usually of highly established reputation, which makes her/his opinion relevant to know about) expresses views on a particular problem or aspect of traffic safety. The expert might be initially approached by the editorial team, or write a position paper on own initiative (in this case, please, get in contact with the TSR to initiate the discussion).

Tight communication is expected between the author and the handling editor. The latter acts as a formal peer reviewer and takes the final decision on whether the paper should be published.

Response letter

Response letter is a format meant to facilitate high-quality post-publication discussions. It may contain critique (or praise) of the work done by the authors of a published article, or point out aspects that are relevant yet not addressed in the original publication. The points raised must be substantive, appropriate (legally, ethically, with regards to language, etc.) and of interest to other readers. The response letter is published as a stand-alone article. The authors of the original article are encouraged (though not obliged) to provide a response which can also be published as a response letter.

A response letter is expected to be relatively short (few pages). It may contain figures and tables if necessary to illustrate the point. It must be clear from the text which TSR publication the letter responds to; similarly, the text must describe in sufficient detail how the original article treats a particular point before criticizing it.

The author must provide a statement regarding any conflicting interests, or state their absence. A published response letter reveals its author's name, affiliation, and contact details. It is not possible to publish a response letter anonymously.

Please, make sure to get in contact with the TSR to initiate the discussion prior to the submission. The entire process is moderated by an assigned journal editor who also has the final decision power in how the letter is treated. In general, the editor's function is to let through only substantial and constructive discussion, free from personal accusations, unsupported opinions, or questionable arguments.

Copyright Notice

If accepted, the manuscript will be published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Privacy Statement

The data collected from authors falls within the scope of the standard functioning of an academic journal. Read more here.