AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Research Article | DOI: https://doi.org/10.31579/2637-8892/055
BABCP CBT Accredited Practitioner, NHS England.
*Corresponding Author: George Varvatsoulias, BABCP CBT Accredited Practitioner, NHS England.
Citation: George Varvatsoulias (2019) Object and Face Naming Tasks In Relation To Same and Different Category Conditions, J. Psychology and Mental Health Care. 3(3): DOI: 10.31579/2637-8892/055
Copyright: © 2019 George Varvatsoulias, This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,provided the original author and source are credited.
Received: 01 October 2019 | Accepted: 13 November 2019 | Published: 16 November 2019
Keywords: object naming; recognition; face naming; recognition; homogeneous; heterogeneous
An experiment of two factors (2X2) within participants ANOVA design was conducted. 20 UEL students in total have taken part. The experiment -partial replication of the Damian et al. (2001) and Vitkovitch et al. (2006) experiments- had two stimuli/factor 1 (object and faces) and a context/factor 2 of four conditions (homogene-ous/heterogeneous for objects and homogeneous/heterogeneous for faces). It was predicted that participants will need longer time to respond to homogeneous objects than to heterogeneous, whereas shorter time for homogeneous faces and longer for heterogeneous ones. The experiment has shown no significant semantic effect for homogeneous and heterogeneous conditions in the context factor, whereas an overall slow significance in relation to the stimulus factor, i.e. faces were named more difficult than the objects. The interaction that was found between objects and faces has shown marginal significance towards the predicted direction on behalf of the faces over the objects. There was concluded that object naming refers to minor latencies compared to high ones of face naming.
The aspect of object and face naming is related to the idea of finding out theoretical accounts about recognition and naming. Researchers are interested in understanding how neuropsychological evidence in connection with object and face naming provide links with brain damage lesions. The processes involved in object and face naming assist neuroscientists to identify and discuss such impairments. Object and face naming experiments play a crucial role towards that direction, for they are able to provide with relevant evidence the understanding of impairments related to recognition.
The consideration of semantic competition is of similar importance in face and object naming. In particular, retrieval of objects is concerned with semantic competition. That is to say that someone by retrieving the name of a ‘horse’ in relation to a picture of a ‘horse’, it means that any cognitive representation of another object, say ‘zebra’, will compete cognitively to the involved understanding of the former. The semantic competition is slowed down, if, for a printed word such as ‘horse’, a picture of ‘zebra’ is shown above. This is known as ‘picture interference’ and means that an unrelated word in contrast to a different picture is activated through a different picture and vice versa (Glaser & Düngelhoff, 1984).
Damian et al. (2001) attempted two experiments referring to lexical retrieval as a competitive process in relation to the semantic context on picture and word naming in German. The authors claimed that the facilitatory effect observed, has been caused because of interactive processes between spelling input and semantic codes. They have found that semantic context the way it interferes in recognizing words is connected with the entry words which are retrieved during speaking. On the other hand, Vitkovitch et al. (2006) have carried out three experiments which were related to semantic priming effects during face naming. They have examined whether there is semantic competition between face and object naming. The results they found provide some evidence concerned with facilitatory effects taking place in naming famous homogeneous faces without having them in parallel to semantic competition. Vitkovitch et al. (2006) consider that there is a need of modification of any face naming serial account so to be differentiated from the already established theoretical claim about object naming.
The aforementioned semantic context and picture-word interference paradigm can also be involved in a manipulation where the semantic context is manipulated and subjects attempt to name faces and objects from both same and different category. The experiment that will take place will question whether participants’ time of naming homogeneous objects and faces is longer or shorter compared to heterogeneous ones. The rationale of this experiment refers to the aspect of retrieving objects and faces in relation to the semantic competition of picture-word interference occurring between related and unrelated fillers. In this way it is predicted that participants will need longer time to name homogeneous stimuli in comparison to heterogeneous ones. The hypothesis for this experiment, therefore, is that participants will need more time to name same category objects than objects from a different category, whereas also unrelated faces compared to related ones.
Participants
Participants were volunteered from a UEL (University of East London) student population. They were 20 males in total. Their age range varied from 18-40. Participants were explained the aim of the experiment. They were told to feel free to withdraw at any time from the experiment if they wanted so. They were also told that the data collected will be treated in confidentiality and for experimental purpose only; that they will remain anonymous, whilst participants were also debriefed after the experiment was completed.
Design and Stimuli
There was conducted an experiment with two factors. The factors are stimulus and context. Each factor has got two levels. The stimulus factor has got the levels of objects and faces and the context factor the homogeneous/heterogeneous category for objects and the homogeneous/ heterogeneous category for faces.
The type of the experiment will be a within-participants ANOVA 2X2 design. There are two independent variables (objects and faces). The dependent variable is the time to name both stimuli.
The four individual conditions were:
Homogeneous objects consisted of four-legged animals such as: dog, sheep, etc;
Heterogeneous objects consisted of unrelated items such as: shirt, orange, spoon etc;
Homogeneous face stimulus was consisted of actors such as: Tom Cruise, Johnnie Depp, etc;
Heterogeneous faces consisted of unrelated faces of singers, politicians, football players, scientists such as: Albert Einstein, David Beckham, Michael Jackson, etc.
In all four conditions the stimuli were repeated five times and in random order. The random order followed the numbers according to the practice sheet. There was also attempted to be controlled confounding variables such as picture distances between the items across all four conditions as well as the faces chosen in both homogeneous and heterogeneous conditions which were all males, so semantic context and sex not to be confounded. In all four conditions pictures were presented in black and white, they were of the same size and height and they covered four A4 pages.
Procedure
In a group of four students, twenty participants were collected -five participants for each experiment. Homogeneous and heterogeneous objects as well as homogeneous and heterogeneous faces were compiled in four A4 pages, where the pictures of objects and faces were differently placed on each of the five rows of the page.
For participants to familiarize themselves with the experiment, they were asked to take part in two practice sessions. The practice would refer to the general procedure of the experiment, so participants to be able to understand what would be required from them. The first session was concerned with naming numbers repeated in a random order of five rows and the second with recognizing all homogeneous and heterogeneous pictures of objects and faces, which were cut and presented to them individually. Participants were also practiced in face naming. They were told to use both names and surnames and were amended if they did not cite them correctly.
After the practice sessions, participants were instructed to look at the first A4 page and name all homogeneous and heterogeneous objects and faces. Stimuli and context in all four conditions were presented in five rows and in random order, just like the numbers in the practice sheet. Attention was kept by the experimenter participants not to repeat the same stimuli twice in succession. Participants were asked to name all stimuli of the sheets by working across the rows of each condition from the left to the right. If they were to find difficult to name any object or face they were told to proceed with the next until the four object and face naming pages to be completed. For the purpose of the experiment the time participants needed to reply to stimuli was measured. For this reason a stopwatch with centisecond timing was introduced, in order the experimenter to time how long participants would need to name from the first stimulus to the last of every sheet. Finally, all four conditions across the participant group followed the order:
1. Homogeneous objects 3. Homogeneous faces
2.Heterogeneous objects 4. Heterogeneous faces
There was conducted a two factors within participants ANOVA design and the analysis obtained from the data collected from the experiment exhibits the following results:
The mean response times (RT), SD, errors, mean error rates and average mean error rate for homogeneous and heterogeneous objects are 28.8sec/26.4sec, 7.8/8.8, 6/3, 0.3/0.15 and 0.22 respectively. That means that participants needed longer time to name the homogeneous objects condition than the heterogeneous one.
On the other hand, the mean response times (RT), SD, errors, mean error rates and average mean error rate for homogeneous and heterogeneous faces are 45.3sec/55sec, 17.16/20.07, 7/9, 0.35/0.45 and 0.4 respectively. In the face naming conditions the analysis showed the other way around. Participants needed longer time to name the heterogeneous faces than the homogeneous ones.
Stimulus | Context | Mean RT | SD | Errors | Mean error rates | Average mean error rate |
Objects | Homogeneous | 28.8sec | 7.8 | 6 | 6÷20=0.3 | 0.3+0.15÷2=0.22 |
| Heterogeneous | 26.4sec | 8.8 | 3 | 3÷20=0.15 |
|
Table 1: Stimulus/Objects Statistics
Stimulus | Context | Mean RT | SD | Errors | Mean error rates | Average mean error rate |
error rate Faces | Homogeneous | 44sec | 17.16 | 7 | 7÷20=0.3 | 0.35+0.45÷2=0.4 |
| Heterogeneous | 55sec | 20.07 | 9 | 9÷20=0.15 |
|
Table 2: Stimulus/Faces Statistics
Finally, there is no significant interaction between stimuli and context. However, the faces factor has a greater impact than the objects one, implying that participants for the face homogeneous/heterogeneous conditions needed more time to respond compared to the object homogeneous/heterogeneous conditions. Both the former and the latter are shown in the graph below:
Figure 1: Inferential Graph
In summing up the results, the analysis of the data has shown that:
The main effect of the stimulus factor indicates that F(1,19)=38.07, p<0>
Object marginal means = 27.63, face marginal means = 50.1
This result underlines that faces are overall named significantly more slowly than objects.
Main effect test for context factor shows that F(1,19)=2.20, p<.15
Homogeneous conditions marginal means = 37.03; heterogeneous conditions marginal
means = 40.7
This result demonstrates that there is no effect of semantic context; in other words there is no significant semantic effect between homogeneous and heterogeneous conditions, despite the trend that the means for heterogeneous condition for faces were named more slowly that the means for homogeneous condition for objects.
3. The test of the interaction between stimulus and context factors gives F(1,19)=3.98, p=.060
There is no significant interaction between the two factors, although the effect of the stimulus factor is slightly different at each level of the context factor.
Once there was a trend, on the borderline, between the two factors (.060), there was run a t-test which showed again the approaching significance of the two factors’ interaction: t(19df)=1.9, p=0.68
The data collected, were analysed by employing a two factor (2X2) within participants ANOVA design. Homogeneity of variance, sphericity and assumptions of normality were met according to the analysis. It is unlikely that the differences between conditions to have arisen due to sampling error, so the null hypothesis cannot be rejected. The main effect of the stimulus factor is less than 0.001, indicating that it is significant, whereas the main effect for the context factor is 0.015, that is to say non-significant. Faces (50.1sec) were named overall significantly slower than objects (27.63sec), whilst the marginal means between homogeneous (37.03) and heterogeneous (40.7) conditions show that there was no effect of semantic context, that is to say that there is no significant difference between homogeneous and heterogeneous conditions, although the heterogeneous condition for faces took longer to be named by participants. On the other hand, the interaction between stimuli and context displays a trend (.060) as this is implied by the mean response time of the graph (Figure 1). The t-test which followed the analysis of the interaction has again exhibited a marginal significance between the two factors (0.68), meaning that the interaction is found towards the predicted direction. The face naming experiment although not actually significant, it means that would be worth replicated for future re-interpretation. Also, the faces condition is more significant than the objects – despite the small trend – and this is shown in their marginal means.
The time participants needed to name the homogeneous objects took longer than the heterogeneous ones, whereas the heterogeneous face naming took participants longer than the homogeneous one. That is to say that picture-word interference in face naming is greater than in object naming. In this way, the initial hypothesis is supported indicating that homogeneous objects and unrelated faces need longer time to be named than heterogeneous objects and related faces.
The experiment has shown that semantic context effects are different for object and face naming. In the first part of the experiment, objects from the same category doubled up naming latencies, whereas different category for objects provided only the half of latencies. The other way around was proved for face naming. Unrelated faces, i.e. different occupational categories, have provided results with higher latencies than the related ones, i.e. actors. The results show that picture-word interference provides homogeneous objects with more errors, than the errors from the heterogeneous one, whereas the homogeneous condition in face naming indicates less errors, than the heterogeneous one instead.
In a similar way, participants for the same semantic category for objects needed longer time to respond, thereby they have scored more errors (6) in a response time of 28.8sec, than the error score (3) to naming objects from different categories with a response time of 26.5sec. In an opposite way, face naming from a different occupational category took longer as much in response time (55sec) as in errors scored (9), from that of the same occupational category, both in time (45.2sec) and errors (7). The average mean error rate between object (0.22) and face naming (0.4) indicate that face naming error rate had almost doubled from the object naming one.
From the results section it is shown clearly that the hypothesis predicted in the introduction is supported. Participants needed longer time to respond as much to homogeneous objects, as to naming faces from a different occupational category. This hypothesis is also supported by both the Damian et al. (2001) and Vitkovitch et al. (2006) papers. In particular, the face naming process is maintained by the conception of the person identity nodes (PINs), implying that there is an actual interference between face recognition and name retrieval (Bruce & Young, 1986).
In view this experiment to be improved and in relation to Damian’s et al. (2001) study that was replicated, there could be increased the number of blocks and the number of participants tested. Participants could be females as well, not only males, as the above experiment was concerned. Also, the design could include different stimuli and more semantic categories in each condition; every stimulus could be rotated in a computer monitor; there could be measured participants’ individual reactions for each stimulus in each condition; the time could be measured in a more sophisticated and computerized way by stopping automatically between the intervals, when changing pictures, or if the participant feels unwell for some reasons. On the other hand, reactions like stuttering and cough or response delays could be measured not in relation to errors but in concert with the participant’s effort to name the stimuli correctly. For this reason there may be introduced a wristwatch measuring the heart rate before, during and after the experiment is completed.
The face naming factor, as the one in relation to the Vitkovitch et al. (2006) study, which constituted the second part of the experiment, could be improved by testing the performance of both males and females separately. Male participants could be asked to name same and different category of male famous faces, whereas female participants to name same and different category of female famous faces. In turn, male participants could be asked to name homogeneous and heterogeneous female famous faces and female participants to name homogeneous and heterogeneous male famous faces. Could this experiment support the hypothesis that the semantic competition of picture-word interference is lower for males when they name male related and unrelated famous faces, in relation to a higher semantic competition of picture-word interference for females when they name male related and unrelated famous faces? Or, could this hypothesis to work vice versa? In other words, could the semantic competition of picture-word interference of same and different category of famous female face naming for males to be rated as higher in relation to a lower one for females when they name same and different category female famous faces? Also, by looking at the relation between visual similarity and visual confusability, during face recognition, would the analysis lead to the predicted directions because of the errors scored by the participants?
Additional interpretation, in relation to object naming is found in respect to semantic similarities and influence interference (Damian et al., 2001). That is to say that the more the lexical entries, the more their semantic interrelatedness is activated (Roelofs, 1992). Kroll & Stewart (1994) argue also that effects of intelligence relate to the semantic context of the target task, indicating that semantic interrelatedness and interference are accounted for competition. Damian et al. (2001) claim that semantic category similarity demonstrates visual confusability as far as the target task is concerned. In this way, there is a competitive process taking place between visual similarity and semantic representation (MacKay, 1987). Morton & Patterson (1980) posit that this process leads to conceptual conflict which accounts for overlapping visual representation with semantic context and how the information is retrieved in return. Finally, according to the capacity theory, by Just & Carpenter (1992) individual differences in working memory storage among individuals show that storage and processing of information is related to semantic comprehension. Such individual differences interpret the way that working memory stores semantic information for both objects and faces as well as how the picture-word interference is involved when such information is retrieved from memory (Eysenck & Keane, 2003).
Face naming is considered to be an overall more difficult task than objects. This is what the experiment has shown in homogeneous/heterogeneous conditions for faces, as well as according to the errors scored. This is supported by both the papers mentioned and the research evidence up today. Some other reason for this prediction is because face naming occurs rarely than objects which people use more frequently.
Further research in this area could include the question whether episodic representation and semantic content may be related to retrieving information for objects and faces. In this way could be questioned whether the memory performance in retrieval tasks has a personal quality, meaning that it is influenced by the individual’s personality and other characteristics, or is it affected by situational demands, as for example the wish to impress one’s attention (Neisser, 1996). In concert with object and face retrieval (Eysenck & Keane, 2003), episodic representation and semantic content can show how an individual’s motivation influences memory in everyday life. On the other hand, there could also be exhibited how episodic representation and semantic content refer to the motivational recall of stimuli and context, as well as to the extent of object and face recognition in relation to semantic competition and interference. Both above will be able to assist researchers looking for cheaters among those who fake amnesia by malingering the condition.
According to the experiment conducted for both object and face naming it is concluded that homogeneous objects need more time to be named than heterogeneous ones, whilst heterogeneous faces are named more slowly than homogeneous ones. That consideration supports the hypothesis that people need more time to name same category items than unrelated ones. Unrelated faces, on the other hand, are slowly responded than related ones. Objects are more easily recognized than faces, which is something that is related to frequency usage of both factors in everyday life. People retrieve picture-word information about objects more accurately than for faces and this is an obvious experience for almost anyone.
The errors participants had scored indicate that the picture-word interference has played a crucial role in the semantic competition between related/unrelated items and faces, as well as between information retrieval and semantic comprehension of the target task. The hypothesis for homogeneous versus heterogeneous items and heterogeneous versus homogeneous faces demonstrated a clear-cut interpretation about how people retrieve information that has been stored and how this information competes in relation to the semantic effect for both items and faces.
Clearly Auctoresonline and particularly Psychology and Mental Health Care Journal is dedicated to improving health care services for individuals and populations. The editorial boards' ability to efficiently recognize and share the global importance of health literacy with a variety of stakeholders. Auctoresonline publishing platform can be used to facilitate of optimal client-based services and should be added to health care professionals' repertoire of evidence-based health care resources.
Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Intervention The submission and review process was adequate. However I think that the publication total value should have been enlightened in early fases. Thank you for all.
Journal of Women Health Care and Issues By the present mail, I want to say thank to you and tour colleagues for facilitating my published article. Specially thank you for the peer review process, support from the editorial office. I appreciate positively the quality of your journal.
Journal of Clinical Research and Reports I would be very delighted to submit my testimonial regarding the reviewer board and the editorial office. The reviewer board were accurate and helpful regarding any modifications for my manuscript. And the editorial office were very helpful and supportive in contacting and monitoring with any update and offering help. It was my pleasure to contribute with your promising Journal and I am looking forward for more collaboration.
We would like to thank the Journal of Thoracic Disease and Cardiothoracic Surgery because of the services they provided us for our articles. The peer-review process was done in a very excellent time manner, and the opinions of the reviewers helped us to improve our manuscript further. The editorial office had an outstanding correspondence with us and guided us in many ways. During a hard time of the pandemic that is affecting every one of us tremendously, the editorial office helped us make everything easier for publishing scientific work. Hope for a more scientific relationship with your Journal.
The peer-review process which consisted high quality queries on the paper. I did answer six reviewers’ questions and comments before the paper was accepted. The support from the editorial office is excellent.
Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. I had the experience of publishing a research article recently. The whole process was simple from submission to publication. The reviewers made specific and valuable recommendations and corrections that improved the quality of my publication. I strongly recommend this Journal.
Dr. Katarzyna Byczkowska My testimonial covering: "The peer review process is quick and effective. The support from the editorial office is very professional and friendly. Quality of the Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on cardiology that is useful for other professionals in the field.
Thank you most sincerely, with regard to the support you have given in relation to the reviewing process and the processing of my article entitled "Large Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of The Prostate Gland: A Review and Update" for publication in your esteemed Journal, Journal of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics". The editorial team has been very supportive.
Testimony of Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology: work with your Reviews has been a educational and constructive experience. The editorial office were very helpful and supportive. It was a pleasure to contribute to your Journal.
Dr. Bernard Terkimbi Utoo, I am happy to publish my scientific work in Journal of Women Health Care and Issues (JWHCI). The manuscript submission was seamless and peer review process was top notch. I was amazed that 4 reviewers worked on the manuscript which made it a highly technical, standard and excellent quality paper. I appreciate the format and consideration for the APC as well as the speed of publication. It is my pleasure to continue with this scientific relationship with the esteem JWHCI.
This is an acknowledgment for peer reviewers, editorial board of Journal of Clinical Research and Reports. They show a lot of consideration for us as publishers for our research article “Evaluation of the different factors associated with side effects of COVID-19 vaccination on medical students, Mutah university, Al-Karak, Jordan”, in a very professional and easy way. This journal is one of outstanding medical journal.
Dear Hao Jiang, to Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing We greatly appreciate the efficient, professional and rapid processing of our paper by your team. If there is anything else we should do, please do not hesitate to let us know. On behalf of my co-authors, we would like to express our great appreciation to editor and reviewers.
As an author who has recently published in the journal "Brain and Neurological Disorders". I am delighted to provide a testimonial on the peer review process, editorial office support, and the overall quality of the journal. The peer review process at Brain and Neurological Disorders is rigorous and meticulous, ensuring that only high-quality, evidence-based research is published. The reviewers are experts in their fields, and their comments and suggestions were constructive and helped improve the quality of my manuscript. The review process was timely and efficient, with clear communication from the editorial office at each stage. The support from the editorial office was exceptional throughout the entire process. The editorial staff was responsive, professional, and always willing to help. They provided valuable guidance on formatting, structure, and ethical considerations, making the submission process seamless. Moreover, they kept me informed about the status of my manuscript and provided timely updates, which made the process less stressful. The journal Brain and Neurological Disorders is of the highest quality, with a strong focus on publishing cutting-edge research in the field of neurology. The articles published in this journal are well-researched, rigorously peer-reviewed, and written by experts in the field. The journal maintains high standards, ensuring that readers are provided with the most up-to-date and reliable information on brain and neurological disorders. In conclusion, I had a wonderful experience publishing in Brain and Neurological Disorders. The peer review process was thorough, the editorial office provided exceptional support, and the journal's quality is second to none. I would highly recommend this journal to any researcher working in the field of neurology and brain disorders.
Dear Agrippa Hilda, Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, Editorial Coordinator, I trust this message finds you well. I want to extend my appreciation for considering my article for publication in your esteemed journal. I am pleased to provide a testimonial regarding the peer review process and the support received from your editorial office. The peer review process for my paper was carried out in a highly professional and thorough manner. The feedback and comments provided by the authors were constructive and very useful in improving the quality of the manuscript. This rigorous assessment process undoubtedly contributes to the high standards maintained by your journal.
International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. I strongly recommend to consider submitting your work to this high-quality journal. The support and availability of the Editorial staff is outstanding and the review process was both efficient and rigorous.
Thank you very much for publishing my Research Article titled “Comparing Treatment Outcome Of Allergic Rhinitis Patients After Using Fluticasone Nasal Spray And Nasal Douching" in the Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology. As Medical Professionals we are immensely benefited from study of various informative Articles and Papers published in this high quality Journal. I look forward to enriching my knowledge by regular study of the Journal and contribute my future work in the field of ENT through the Journal for use by the medical fraternity. The support from the Editorial office was excellent and very prompt. I also welcome the comments received from the readers of my Research Article.
Dear Erica Kelsey, Editorial Coordinator of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics Our team is very satisfied with the processing of our paper by your journal. That was fast, efficient, rigorous, but without unnecessary complications. We appreciated the very short time between the submission of the paper and its publication on line on your site.
I am very glad to say that the peer review process is very successful and fast and support from the Editorial Office. Therefore, I would like to continue our scientific relationship for a long time. And I especially thank you for your kindly attention towards my article. Have a good day!
"We recently published an article entitled “Influence of beta-Cyclodextrins upon the Degradation of Carbofuran Derivatives under Alkaline Conditions" in the Journal of “Pesticides and Biofertilizers” to show that the cyclodextrins protect the carbamates increasing their half-life time in the presence of basic conditions This will be very helpful to understand carbofuran behaviour in the analytical, agro-environmental and food areas. We greatly appreciated the interaction with the editor and the editorial team; we were particularly well accompanied during the course of the revision process, since all various steps towards publication were short and without delay".
I would like to express my gratitude towards you process of article review and submission. I found this to be very fair and expedient. Your follow up has been excellent. I have many publications in national and international journal and your process has been one of the best so far. Keep up the great work.
We are grateful for this opportunity to provide a glowing recommendation to the Journal of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy. We found that the editorial team were very supportive, helpful, kept us abreast of timelines and over all very professional in nature. The peer review process was rigorous, efficient and constructive that really enhanced our article submission. The experience with this journal remains one of our best ever and we look forward to providing future submissions in the near future.
I am very pleased to serve as EBM of the journal, I hope many years of my experience in stem cells can help the journal from one way or another. As we know, stem cells hold great potential for regenerative medicine, which are mostly used to promote the repair response of diseased, dysfunctional or injured tissue using stem cells or their derivatives. I think Stem Cell Research and Therapeutics International is a great platform to publish and share the understanding towards the biology and translational or clinical application of stem cells.
I would like to give my testimony in the support I have got by the peer review process and to support the editorial office where they were of asset to support young author like me to be encouraged to publish their work in your respected journal and globalize and share knowledge across the globe. I really give my great gratitude to your journal and the peer review including the editorial office.
I am delighted to publish our manuscript entitled "A Perspective on Cocaine Induced Stroke - Its Mechanisms and Management" in the Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. The peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal are excellent. The manuscripts published are of high quality and of excellent scientific value. I recommend this journal very much to colleagues.
Dr.Tania Muñoz, My experience as researcher and author of a review article in The Journal Clinical Cardiology and Interventions has been very enriching and stimulating. The editorial team is excellent, performs its work with absolute responsibility and delivery. They are proactive, dynamic and receptive to all proposals. Supporting at all times the vast universe of authors who choose them as an option for publication. The team of review specialists, members of the editorial board, are brilliant professionals, with remarkable performance in medical research and scientific methodology. Together they form a frontline team that consolidates the JCCI as a magnificent option for the publication and review of high-level medical articles and broad collective interest. I am honored to be able to share my review article and open to receive all your comments.
“The peer review process of JPMHC is quick and effective. Authors are benefited by good and professional reviewers with huge experience in the field of psychology and mental health. The support from the editorial office is very professional. People to contact to are friendly and happy to help and assist any query authors might have. Quality of the Journal is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on mental health that is useful for other professionals in the field”.
Dear editorial department: On behalf of our team, I hereby certify the reliability and superiority of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews in the peer review process, editorial support, and journal quality. Firstly, the peer review process of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is rigorous, fair, transparent, fast, and of high quality. The editorial department invites experts from relevant fields as anonymous reviewers to review all submitted manuscripts. These experts have rich academic backgrounds and experience, and can accurately evaluate the academic quality, originality, and suitability of manuscripts. The editorial department is committed to ensuring the rigor of the peer review process, while also making every effort to ensure a fast review cycle to meet the needs of authors and the academic community. Secondly, the editorial team of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is composed of a group of senior scholars and professionals with rich experience and professional knowledge in related fields. The editorial department is committed to assisting authors in improving their manuscripts, ensuring their academic accuracy, clarity, and completeness. Editors actively collaborate with authors, providing useful suggestions and feedback to promote the improvement and development of the manuscript. We believe that the support of the editorial department is one of the key factors in ensuring the quality of the journal. Finally, the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is renowned for its high- quality articles and strict academic standards. The editorial department is committed to publishing innovative and academically valuable research results to promote the development and progress of related fields. The International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is reasonably priced and ensures excellent service and quality ratio, allowing authors to obtain high-level academic publishing opportunities in an affordable manner. I hereby solemnly declare that the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews has a high level of credibility and superiority in terms of peer review process, editorial support, reasonable fees, and journal quality. Sincerely, Rui Tao.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions I testity the covering of the peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, we deeply appreciate the interest shown in our work and its publication. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you. The peer review process, as well as the support provided by the editorial office, have been exceptional, and the quality of the journal is very high, which was a determining factor in our decision to publish with you.
The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews journal clinically in the future time.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I would like to express my sincerest gratitude for the trust placed in our team for the publication in your journal. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you on this project. I am pleased to inform you that both the peer review process and the attention from the editorial coordination have been excellent. Your team has worked with dedication and professionalism to ensure that your publication meets the highest standards of quality. We are confident that this collaboration will result in mutual success, and we are eager to see the fruits of this shared effort.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I hope this message finds you well. I want to express my utmost gratitude for your excellent work and for the dedication and speed in the publication process of my article titled "Navigating Innovation: Qualitative Insights on Using Technology for Health Education in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients." I am very satisfied with the peer review process, the support from the editorial office, and the quality of the journal. I hope we can maintain our scientific relationship in the long term.
Dear Monica Gissare, - Editorial Coordinator of Nutrition and Food Processing. ¨My testimony with you is truly professional, with a positive response regarding the follow-up of the article and its review, you took into account my qualities and the importance of the topic¨.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, The review process for the article “The Handling of Anti-aggregants and Anticoagulants in the Oncologic Heart Patient Submitted to Surgery” was extremely rigorous and detailed. From the initial submission to the final acceptance, the editorial team at the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” demonstrated a high level of professionalism and dedication. The reviewers provided constructive and detailed feedback, which was essential for improving the quality of our work. Communication was always clear and efficient, ensuring that all our questions were promptly addressed. The quality of the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” is undeniable. It is a peer-reviewed, open-access publication dedicated exclusively to disseminating high-quality research in the field of clinical cardiology and cardiovascular interventions. The journal's impact factor is currently under evaluation, and it is indexed in reputable databases, which further reinforces its credibility and relevance in the scientific field. I highly recommend this journal to researchers looking for a reputable platform to publish their studies.
Dear Editorial Coordinator of the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing! "I would like to thank the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing for including and publishing my article. The peer review process was very quick, movement and precise. The Editorial Board has done an extremely conscientious job with much help, valuable comments and advices. I find the journal very valuable from a professional point of view, thank you very much for allowing me to be part of it and I would like to participate in the future!”
Dealing with The Journal of Neurology and Neurological Surgery was very smooth and comprehensive. The office staff took time to address my needs and the response from editors and the office was prompt and fair. I certainly hope to publish with this journal again.Their professionalism is apparent and more than satisfactory. Susan Weiner
My Testimonial Covering as fellowing: Lin-Show Chin. The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews.
My experience publishing in Psychology and Mental Health Care was exceptional. The peer review process was rigorous and constructive, with reviewers providing valuable insights that helped enhance the quality of our work. The editorial team was highly supportive and responsive, making the submission process smooth and efficient. The journal's commitment to high standards and academic rigor makes it a respected platform for quality research. I am grateful for the opportunity to publish in such a reputable journal.
My experience publishing in International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews was exceptional. I Come forth to Provide a Testimonial Covering the Peer Review Process and the editorial office for the Professional and Impartial Evaluation of the Manuscript.
