Issues in Science and Technology: Scopus, Scope, and Submission Guide

Quick Answer: What Is Issues in Science and Technology?

Issues in Science and Technology is a quarterly journal and policy forum established in 1984. Its central subject is the relationship between scientific and technological change and public decision-making. Rather than publishing only for narrow disciplinary audiences, it aims to make expert ideas understandable and useful to policymakers, researchers, industry leaders, educators, and engaged nonspecialists.

The supplied Scopus record identifies the publication as a journal with Scopus Source Record ID 23049. The verified print ISSN is 0748-5492 and the online ISSN is 1938-1557. Researchers who need Scopus indexing, coverage years, CiteScore, quartile, SJR, or SNIP for a university or PhD requirement should confirm the latest values directly in the current Scopus source profile because database metrics and coverage can change.

A suitable contribution is likely to make a clear, evidence-informed argument about a science, technology, innovation, health, engineering, education, environment, or related policy problem and connect that argument to practical choices by government, industry, academia, communities, or individuals. The journal specifically encourages prospective authors to study previous articles and submit a pitch before drafting a full manuscript.

Key Takeaways

• Publisher: the official site states that Issues in Science and Technology is published by the National Academy of Sciences and Arizona State University.
• Identifiers: print ISSN 0748-5492; online ISSN 1938-1557; supplied Scopus Source Record ID 23049.
• Frequency and history: quarterly, English-language, US publication with an ISSN record running from 1984 to the present.
• Editorial purpose: informed, accessible discussion of public policy related to science, technology, innovation, and society.
• Submission route: the journal asks authors to pitch an idea before preparing a full draft and says it aims to respond to pitches within 1–2 weeks.
• Editorial process: the official submission page describes close editing by Issues editors; it does not publicly describe a standard external anonymous peer-review model for submitted policy articles.
• Fees and metrics: an author APC, acceptance rate, average manuscript review duration, and current Scopus metrics were not found as publicly stated official submission facts; verify current database and fee information before relying on it.

Journal Information at a Glance

What This Page Covers

• the journal’s identity, publisher, ISSNs, publication history, and Scopus source record;
• its aims, audience, policy orientation, and topic coverage;
• what kinds of contributions and arguments are likely to fit;
• how the pitch-first submission process works;
• what is and is not publicly stated about peer review, fees, acceptance rates, and timelines;
• how to evaluate journal fit before committing substantial drafting time;
• practical manuscript-readiness steps for policy-facing scholarly writing; and
• how Contentxprtz can support ethical editing and submission readiness without promising acceptance.

Methodology and Source Note

This profile was prepared using the journal information supplied with the task and authoritative sources including the official Issues in Science and Technology website, its submissions/contact page, the ISSN Portal, and the supplied Scopus source profile. Journal policies, editorial teams, indexing coverage, database metrics, subscription arrangements, and submission instructions may change. Authors should recheck the official journal and database pages immediately before submission or before using a metric for institutional compliance.

What Is Issues in Science and Technology?

The journal occupies a distinctive space between scholarly expertise and public-policy debate. Its official description explicitly contrasts Issues with both popular magazines and professional journals: the goal is not simply for journalists to report expert work or for specialists to communicate only with specialists. Instead, the publication brings researchers together with government officials, business leaders, and other people who influence or are affected by science and technology policy.

This positioning has practical consequences for authors. A technically sophisticated topic may fit only if the manuscript translates its significance into a policy problem that a broad, educated audience can follow. A contribution should not depend on disciplinary jargon to establish authority. It should explain why the issue matters, what evidence or experience supports the argument, what choices decision-makers face, and what actions could improve outcomes.

Issues in Science and Technology Aims and Scope

The journal’s stated purpose is to improve public discussion and decision-making around science and technology. It seeks contributions that are deeply informed but highly accessible, challenging but constructive, and relevant to how societies advance knowledge and innovation to achieve social goals. Its archive demonstrates a broad interpretation of this mission, spanning areas such as research policy, artificial intelligence, education, health and medicine, climate and energy, infrastructure, national security, public data, innovation policy, science politics, ethics, and the relationship between science and society.

That breadth does not mean any science or technology manuscript will fit. A laboratory study with no developed policy argument may be scientifically strong but still be poorly aligned. Likewise, a generic opinion essay that lacks evidence, context, or a meaningful recommendation is unlikely to match the journal’s description of informed and analytically rigorous writing.

Topics that may align well

• science funding, research institutions, and the governance of scientific systems;
• technology policy, AI governance, automation, data infrastructure, and digital society;
• innovation systems, industrial policy, and the social consequences of emerging technologies;
• health, medicine, biotechnology, and public-policy implications of scientific advances;
• climate, energy, transportation, engineering, and infrastructure policy;
• STEM education, workforce development, universities, and research training;
• ethics, public trust, misinformation, democratic accountability, and science communication;
• international or national-security dimensions of science and technology.

Who Should Consider Submitting?

The official journal says its pages are open to anyone who can write an informed, well-reasoned, policy-relevant article. That can include university researchers, scientists, engineers, policy scholars, government officials, industry leaders, nonprofit experts, educators, and practitioners. Academic seniority is not itself the key criterion; the stronger question is whether the author has a credible basis for the argument and can communicate it to nonspecialists.

For a PhD scholar or early-career researcher, the journal may be relevant when the work produces a clear policy insight rather than only a conventional disciplinary result. Before treating it as a degree-compliance publication venue, however, researchers should confirm their university’s rules. Some institutions distinguish between conventional peer-reviewed research articles and policy essays, commentary, perspectives, or other article categories.

What Types of Articles Does the Journal Publish?

The official site publishes feature and perspective-style policy essays, interviews, forum responses, editorials, and other formats. Its submissions page specifically welcomes articles that analyze and provide original perspectives on policy issues related to science, technology, and society. These pieces are expected to provide context and recommend actions by government, industry, academia, individuals, or other stakeholders.

The journal also invites Forum letters of approximately 500 words responding to topics covered in Issues. It states that it does not accept unsolicited book reviews. Because article labels and editorial priorities can evolve, prospective authors should review several recent issues and confirm the appropriate format with the editors through the pitch process.

How the Submission Process Works

The current submission guidance is unusually clear about sequence: pitch first, draft later. The editors ask prospective contributors to send a pitch so the journal can provide feedback before the author invests time in a full manuscript. The stated purpose is to make sure the proposed article is framed appropriately and follows the journal’s expectations for citations, style, length, and overall format.

1. Study recent articles. Identify pieces with a similar policy problem, audience, argumentative style, or evidence base.
2. Define the policy question. State the problem in terms that matter to decision-makers, not only specialists.
3. Prepare a concise pitch. Explain the central claim, why the issue matters now, what evidence or experience supports it, and what concrete actions or choices the article will discuss.
4. Send the pitch to the editorial team. The official contact page lists editors@issues.org for editorial correspondence.
5. Wait for editorial feedback before drafting the full piece. The journal says it aims to respond to all pitches within 1–2 weeks and invites a follow-up nudge if no response arrives within two weeks.
6. Prepare the manuscript to the agreed framing. Follow the editor’s instructions on length, citations, style, voice, and supporting material.
7. Disclose AI use where applicable. The current submission page asks authors who use AI in any part of their writing process to explain how, why, and which tools were used.

Manuscript and Style Requirements: What Is Publicly Known?

The official submission page does not publish a single generic word limit or universal reference template for all article formats. Instead, it indicates that editors will use the pitch stage to help align the planned piece with the journal’s format, including citations, style, and length. This makes early editorial communication more important than trying to force a manuscript into a guessed template.

As a publication-readiness step, authors should still prepare a clean evidence trail: verify factual claims, retain source links or citations, distinguish evidence from interpretation, avoid overclaiming, and write for an educated reader who may not share the author’s specialist vocabulary. Where a technical term is necessary, explain it at first use and connect it quickly to the policy consequence.

What Is Known About Peer Review and Editorial Review?

The official submission information says manuscripts are carefully edited by Issues editors, who work closely with authors so arguments are clear, factual, and effective. The materials reviewed for this profile do not describe a standard double-blind, single-blind, or external anonymous peer-review workflow for these policy submissions.

Authors should therefore avoid assuming that the publication process is identical to a conventional research journal simply because the title is indexed in scholarly databases. If external peer review is important for a degree, promotion, grant, or institutional reporting requirement, ask the editors directly and obtain clarification on the review process for the specific article type you plan to submit.

Open Access, Subscriptions, Copyright, and Publication Fees

Issues makes substantial material available online and also offers print and institutional digital subscriptions. The official site states that its material is copyrighted and that permission is generally required to photocopy or reprint an article or section unless otherwise specified. This is not the presentation of a conventional author-pays gold-open-access journal with a prominently stated APC schedule.

No author article-processing charge or publication fee was found on the official submissions page reviewed for this article. That absence should not be converted into a permanent claim that publication is always free. Authors should ask the editorial office about any current charges, rights terms, licensing options, or special-format costs that could apply to their contribution.

Indexing, Scopus, and Journal Metrics

The task input supplies a Scopus source link and Source Record ID 23049 for Issues in Science and Technology. This supports identifying the correct Scopus source record for the title. The journal’s print and online ISSNs also match the authoritative ISSN Portal records.

Current metric values such as CiteScore, SJR, SNIP, and Scopus quartile can change between reporting cycles. Because an accessible official Scopus metric page was not independently captured during this review, this guide does not reproduce values from third-party metric aggregators. Researchers should use the live Scopus source profile for current values and coverage, and Clarivate’s official resources for any current Journal Impact Factor or Web of Science category information.

This distinction matters when a university requires, for example, “a Q1 or Q2 Scopus journal” at the time of submission or publication. A historical quartile shown on an unofficial website is not an adequate substitute for the university’s required database and reporting year.

Editorial Leadership

The official masthead currently lists Lisa Margonelli as editor-in-chief, supported by a team that includes managing, senior, projects, digital engagement, assistant, consulting, and contributing editors. Editorial rosters can change, so authors should use the current masthead rather than copying names from older citations or directory pages.

How to Decide Whether Your Manuscript Fits

A strong fit decision should be based on the journal’s actual editorial logic, not only indexing or a metric. Ask five questions:

1. Is there a real policy problem? The manuscript should connect science or technology to decisions, institutions, public goals, or social consequences.
2. Is the contribution an argument, not merely a report? Explain what should change, what alternatives exist, or what decision-makers should understand differently.
3. Can a nonspecialist follow it? Reduce unnecessary jargon and provide context before technical detail.
4. Is the evidence strong enough for the claim? Policy writing still requires factual discipline, transparent sourcing, and acknowledgement of uncertainty.
5. Does the voice resemble recent Issues articles? Read several current examples before pitching.

Common Reasons a Proposed Article May Be Unsuitable

• a narrow technical study with no developed policy or societal significance;
• a manuscript written primarily for a specialist disciplinary audience;
• a generic opinion piece with limited evidence or no actionable insight;
• a conventional literature review that does not develop an original policy perspective;
• a full unsolicited manuscript prepared without first using the journal’s pitch process;
• an unsolicited book review, which the journal expressly says it does not accept;
• a submission whose claims cannot be fact-checked or whose recommendations exceed the evidence.

How to Prepare a Stronger, Journal-Aligned Pitch

For Issues, the pitch is not a minor cover note; it is the point where journal fit is tested. A useful pitch can be built around four components: problem, insight, evidence, action. Describe the policy problem, state what the article will add, identify the evidence or lived expertise supporting that insight, and explain what concrete action or choice follows.

As practical guidance rather than a stated journal rule, keep the pitch specific enough that an editor can see the article’s architecture. Avoid promising to “discuss the importance of AI” or “explore challenges in science policy.” Instead, specify the tension, the affected actors, the evidence base, and the proposed change. If the article rests on original research, translate the result into a policy implication rather than reproducing the structure of a research paper.

Publication Ethics and Responsible Use of AI

The journal’s current submissions page specifically asks authors to disclose AI use in any part of the writing process, including how, why, and what tools were used. That instruction should be treated as an active submission requirement. Authors should also maintain responsibility for factual accuracy, source verification, originality, authorship, and the final argument.

More generally, do not use professional editing or generative tools to fabricate references, invent data, obscure authorship responsibilities, manipulate images or evidence deceptively, or imply endorsements that do not exist. If a university, funder, employer, or coauthor agreement imposes stricter rules, follow those rules in addition to the journal’s stated expectations.

Journal-Fit Checklist Before You Pitch

• My article addresses a clearly defined science, technology, innovation, or related policy issue.
• I can explain the article’s significance to educated nonspecialists.
• I have evidence, experience, or analysis sufficient to support the central claim.
• The article offers a specific perspective, recommendation, or decision framework.
• I have read several recent Issues articles with related themes.
• I have not assumed a conventional research-paper format where a policy essay is more appropriate.
• I can explain any AI use transparently.
• I will verify current indexing and metric requirements separately if my institution requires them.

How Contentxprtz Can Support Publication Readiness

Contentxprtz can support researchers who already have a genuine argument, evidence base, and authorship responsibility but need help presenting the work clearly and in a journal-aligned form. Relevant support may include manuscript assessment, academic editing, language polishing for ESL authors, structural editing, reference and citation consistency, journal-format checks, pitch and cover-letter editing, submission-readiness review, and revision of responses to editorial feedback.

For this particular journal, useful support may focus on converting a specialist draft into an accessible policy argument, strengthening the problem–evidence–recommendation structure, identifying jargon that obscures the message, checking whether claims are appropriately qualified, and ensuring the pitch accurately represents the proposed article.

Contentxprtz does not guarantee acceptance, publication, peer-review outcomes, indexing, citations, or editorial decisions. The journal’s editors remain responsible for editorial judgment, and the author remains responsible for the research, evidence, disclosures, argument, and final submission.

Explore Journal Publication Support

Summary

Issues in Science and Technology is a long-running quarterly policy journal published by the National Academy of Sciences and Arizona State University. Its value for prospective authors lies in its cross-sector audience and its focus on accessible, evidence-informed arguments about how science and technology interact with public goals and decision-making.

The supplied Scopus record identifies Source ID 23049, while authoritative ISSN records confirm print ISSN 0748-5492 and online ISSN 1938-1557. The most important practical submission detail is the journal’s pitch-first process: prospective authors are encouraged to contact the editors before drafting a full manuscript, and the journal says it aims to respond to pitches within 1–2 weeks. Current metrics, coverage, fees, and institutional eligibility should always be rechecked in the relevant official database or with the journal before submission.