Instructions for Authors

Who Can Submit?: Anyone may submit an original paper to be considered for publication in our journals, provided he or she owns the copyright to the work being submitted or is authorized by the copyright owner or owners to submit the article. Authors are limited to two submissions in a period of twelve (12) months. Namely, the authors and co-authors cannot submit more than two papers to this journal (including co-authored papers) within this period.

Author Responsibilities: For our journals, papers should attempt to present research, innovations, and theoretical and/or practical insights in relevant current literature and debates. Submitted manuscripts should only be in English. Only the Latin alphabet should be used in the article.

After uploading the article, an automatic confirmation message will be sent to all authors. The authors cannot be changed in the article after submission, nor can the authors' order be changed.

All submissions should be sent via the journal’s manuscript submission system as Word files with the doc or docx extension.

The recommended word count for submissions is approximately 7000-8000. A manuscript should be no more than 10.000 words; this limit includes figures, references, and tables. All tables and figures should be inserted into the text. Significant feature articles may be somewhat longer than 10,000 words at the discretion of the editors. The abstract should be less than 250 words. Abbreviations are not allowed in the title. Professional proofreading of the paper should be done before submission. The journal editor may request a proofreading certificate.

Authors should be aware that they are addressing an international audience. Articles should present original work and, where appropriate, should acknowledge any significant contribution of others. Manuscripts submitted to our journals for review should not have been accepted for publication elsewhere. As an author, you are required to secure permission if you want to reproduce any figure, table, or extract from the text of another source. This applies to direct reproduction as well as "derivative reproduction" (where you have created a new figure or table that derives substantially from a copyrighted source).

The corresponding author should always be willing to participate in the peer review process and obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes. A list of references should be included in the submitted paper. Grant/financial support should be stated in the paper if available. All authors are expected to contribute significantly to the research.

Page style: Articles should be typed in 12-point font on A4 page, paginated and double-spaced. Margins should be set as top & bottom: 2,5 cm and left & right 2,5 cm. The title should be followed by an abstract of 150 to 250 words and 3 to 5 keywords. Footnotes should be avoided and endnotes kept to a minimum. All pages should be numbered.

References: Paper format including references should follow American Psychological Association (APA) (7th Edition) style. Please see our citation guide (https://rhapsode.co.uk/citation-guide, see for more examples: https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/references/examples). Your reference list should be in English. 

If a source is in another language, write the original title, then add its English translation as the below example:

Bussieres, E.-L., St-Germain, A., Dube, M., & Richard, M.-C. (2017). Efficacite et efficience des programmes de transition a la vie adulte: Une revue systematique [Effectiveness and efficiency of adult transition programs: A systematic review]. Canadian Psychology/ Psychologie canadienne, 58(1), 354–365. https://doi.org/10.1037/cap0000104

Note for this example that Canadian Psychology/ Psychologie canadienne is a bilingual journal that is published with a bilingual title; if the journal title were only in French it would not be necessary to translate it in the reference.

If the other language uses a different alphabet from the one you are writing in, transliterate the alphabet into the Roman alphabet. If transliteration is not possible or advisable, it is acceptable to reproduce the original alphabet in the paper.

E.g.,

Amano, N., & Kondo, H. (2000). Nihongo no goi tokusei [Lexical characteristics of Japanese language] (Vol. 7). Sansei-do.

Paper template: Author(s) must use the template of our journals for their research paper(s). As you can see from the template, the research manuscripts should include the following parts: A full title, a short title to be used as a running head, authors' names, authors' affiliated institution name(s), authors' email addresses, authors' ORCID numbers, authorship contribution statement, abstract, keywords, introduction, literature review, methodology, findings/ results (separately), discussion (separately), conclusion (separately), recommendations (separately), limitations (separately), and references. 

The review manuscripts should include the following parts: A full title, a short title to be used as a running head, authors' names, authors' affiliated institution name(s), authors' email addresses, authors' ORCID numbers, abstract, keywords, authorship contribution statement, introduction, methodology, results (separately), conclusion (separately) and references. Introduction: Provides information about the context, indicates the motivation for the review, defines the focus, and the research question, and explains the text structure. Methodology: contains, for example, information about data sources (e.g., bibliographic databases), search terms and search strategies, selection criteria (inclusion/exclusion of studies), the number of studies screened and the number of studies included, and statistical methods of meta-analysis. Results: Main Text of the Review Article. Reasoning-based information and ideas. Conclusion: Discussion of the outcome and interpretations.

The theoretical manuscripts should include the following parts: A full title, a short title to be used as a running head, authors' names, authors' affiliated institution name(s), authors' email addresses, authors' ORCID numbers, abstract, keywords, authorship contribution statement, introduction, theoretical framework or model (separately), conclusion (separately) and references. Introduction: Provides information about the context, indicates the motivation for the review, defines the focus, and the research question, and explains the text structure. Theoretical framework or model:  Main Text of the theoretical article. It should be supported with literature. Author(s) may use more than a sub-section. Conclusion: Discussion of the outcome, and interpretations.

Tables and captions to illustrations: Tables must be typed out on the same document. Tables and figures should be numbered. The approximate position of tables and figures should be indicated in the paper. Captions should include keys to symbols.

Figures: All diagrams and photographs are termed "Figures" and should be numbered consecutively. Figures should be given short descriptive captions.

Publication Ethics and Plagiarism Policy

Publication Ethics Statement: For all parties involved in the process of publishing (authors, Editorial Board, and reviewers), it is necessary to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior. To guarantee high ethical standards, our journals have developed international standards for all parties. Our journals expect all the parties to commit to these standards.

International Standards for Authors: Our journals do not require all authors of a research paper to sign a letter of submission, nor does it impose an order on the list of authors. All authors who submit to our journals are expected to observe the international standards for authors voluntarily. Our journals adhere to International Standards for Authors developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics and encourages all authors to refer to these standards.

• Authors must certify that their manuscripts are their original work. Plagiarism, Duplicate, Data Fabrication and Falsification, and Redundant Publications are forbidden.
• Authors must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published and is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere.
• If the authors have used the work and/or words of others, the authors must ensure that the work and/or words of others are appropriately cited or quoted and identify all sources used in the creation of their manuscripts.
• When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the Journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
• Authors must notify our journals of any conflicts of interest.
• Authors must ensure the confidentiality and anonymity of the participants while collecting, analyzing, and reporting data.
• For studies involving human subjects, authors must obtain approval from their institutional ethics committee and confirm that recognized standards, such as the Declaration of Helsinki (see https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki-ethical-principles-for-medical-research-involving-human-subjects/#:~:text=The%20World%20Medical%20Association%20(WMA,identifiable%20human%20material%20and%20data), have been followed to minimize harm to participants. Authors must obtain informed consent from human participants. They must also ensure the information they collect from participants does not contain any identifiable information and mitigate the risk of being able to assign data to specific individuals.
• Children participating in research have a particular right to protection. Therefore, authors must obtain parental or guardian consent before data collection. They must also gain informed consent of other vulnerable individuals, i.e., the disadvantaged, prisoners, and minorities. 
• Research ethics policies for studies involving the participation of human subjects (e.g., consent, participant anonymity, etc.) and vulnerable populations (i.e., children – parent/guardian consent) are also expected to be present on the journal website, in line with accepted standard practices in the field.
• Authors must ensure that all participants in their study have given informed consent for publication.
• According to the WMA Declaration of Helsinki – Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects, “Some groups and individuals are particularly vulnerable and may have an increased likelihood of being wronged or of incurring additional harm. All vulnerable groups and individuals should receive specifically considered protection”. (see https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki-ethical-principles-for-medical-research-involving-human-subjects/)
• Accordingly, authors must consider issues arising from working with potentially vulnerable people and must address how such risks to these participants are minimized and how they are protected from risks.

International Standards for Editorial Board:

Editors and the Editorial Board are required to follow the international standards for the Editorial Board:

●  The Editorial Board must keep information pertaining to all submitted manuscripts confidential. 
●  The Editorial Board is responsible for making publication decisions for submitted manuscripts. 
●  The Editorial Board must strive to meet the needs of readers and authors. 
●  The Editorial Board must evaluate manuscripts only for their intellectual content. 
●  The Editorial Board must strive to constantly improve our journals’ quality. 
●  The Editorial Board must maintain the integrity of the academic record. 
●  The Editorial Board must disclose any conflicts of interest and preclude business needs from compromising intellectual and ethical standards. 
●  The Editorial Board must always be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies when needed.

International Standards for Reviewers:

Reviewers of our journals are also expected to meet the international standards for reviewers when they accept to review invitations.

●  Reviewers must keep information pertaining to the manuscript confidential. 
●  Reviewers must bring to the attention of the Editor Board any information that may be a reason to reject publication of a manuscript. 
●  Reviewers must evaluate manuscripts only for their intellectual content. 
●  Reviewers must objectively evaluate the manuscripts based only on their originality, significance, and relevance to the domains of the journal. 
●  Reviewers must notify our journals about any conflicts of interest.

Our journals do not require all authors to sign the letter of submission. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all authors have agreed to be listed and approved for the paper submission to the journal, and for approved papers managing all communication between the journal and all co-authors, before and after publication. All manuscripts are checked for plagiarism using iThenticate tool by RHAPSODE. Authors should strictly avoid plagiarism, including self-plagiarism. Manuscripts with over 15% overlapping from the similarity report results exceeding 15% would not be considered for publication by our journals. Papers submitted to our journals must be original and not be published or submitted for publication elsewhere. 

The editorial board will thoroughly check submitted manuscripts in order to identify and prevent possible research misconduct regarding the publication of papers with our journals. If research misconduct is identified, according to Editor’s and reviewers’ feedback, the corresponding author is responsible for retracting or correcting articles.
RHAPSODE is a member of iThenticate, an initiative to help editors verify the originality of submitted manuscripts.
RHAPSODE refers to the ethical principles set out by Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Peer Review Policy: All contents of our journals are subject to peer-review. All articles published in our journals have undergone rigorous peer review (double-blind peer review), by members of the editorial board and the review panel. The journal’s editor first checks and evaluates the submitted manuscripts, examining their fit and quality regarding their significance, manuscript format, and research quality. If it is suitable for potential publication, the editor directs the manuscript to two reviewers, with both of them being experts in the field. After both reviewers' feedback, the editorial board decides if the manuscript will be rejected, accepted with revisions needed, or accepted for publication. A diagram that illustrates the review and publishing process can be seen below.

 

 

Reviewers are objective in all judgments in the peer-review process. They are assigned to avoid conflicts of interest. Reviewers might point out relevant published work that has not yet been cited. Submitted manuscripts are treated confidentially prior to publication.

Peer reviewed feedback and results will be sent to the corresponding author for corrections (if necessary). Edits will be made available to corresponding authors before publishing. Edited/Revised papers should be returned to the publisher within three days.

The practice of peer review is to ensure that only good science is published. All manuscripts submitted to our journals are peer-reviewed, following the procedure outlined below.

Initial manuscript evaluation: The Editors first evaluate all manuscripts. It is rare but possible for an exceptional manuscript to be accepted at this stage. Manuscripts rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside of the aims and scope of the journal. Authors of manuscripts rejected at this stage will be informed within 2-3 weeks of receipt.

Type of peer review: This journal employs double-blind review, where the author and referee remain anonymous throughout the process.

How the referee is selected: Whenever possible, referees are matched to the paper according to their expertise. Our database is constantly being updated. We welcome suggestions from the author for referees, though these recommendations are not necessarily used.

Referee reports: Referees are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript:

– Is original

– Makes a theoretical contribution to the study of educational sciences

– Is methodologically sound

– Follows appropriate ethical guidelines

– Has results that are clearly presented and support the conclusions

– Correctly cites previous relevant work

Language correction is not part of the peer review process, but referees may, if they wish, suggest corrections to the manuscript.

How long does the review process take? The time required for the review process is dependent on the referees' response. However, the typical time for our journals is approximately three months. Should the referees' reports contradict one another or a report is unnecessarily delayed, a further expert opinion will be sought. In rare cases for which it is extremely difficult to find a second referee to review the manuscript, or when the one referee's report has thoroughly convinced the Editor, decisions at this stage to accept, reject, or ask the author for a revision are made on the basis of only one referee's report. The Editor's decision will be sent to the author with recommendations made by the referees, which usually include verbatim comments by the referees. Revised manuscripts might be returned to the initial referees, who may then request another revision of a manuscript.

A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the referees and may include verbatim comments by the referees.

The Editor's decision is final. Referees advise the Editor, who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article.

Becoming a referee for our journals: If you are not currently a referee of our journals but would like to be considered as a referee, don't hesitate to get in touch with the editorial office of the journals. The benefits of refereeing for our journals include the opportunity to read, see, and evaluate the latest work in your research area at an early stage and to contribute to the overall integrity of academic research and its published documentation. You may also be able to cite your work for our journals as part of your professional development requirements for various professional societies and organizations.

Complaints Policy

We aim to respond to and resolve all complaints quickly and constructively. The procedures to investigate and resolve complaints followed by our journals aim to be fair and balanced for those making complaints and for those being complained about.

For Appeal Against Editorial Decisions: If the authors disagree with the editorial decision on their manuscripts, they have a right to appeal. Authors who wish to appeal an editorial decision should contact the executive editor of the journal. In such cases, the executive editor will review the manuscript, as well as the editorial and peer reviewers' comments, and give his/her decision to accept or reject a manuscript. The executive editor may, if so required, send the manuscript to a new handling editor for a fresh editorial review and to new referees for peer review. The decision of the executive editor in such cases will be final.

Complaints related to policies, procedures, editorial content, and actions of the editorial staff:

The procedure to make a complaint is easy. The complaint can be made by writing an email. Ideally, the complaint should be made to the person with whom the complainant is in regular contact for the matter being complained about. If due to any reason it is not appropriate or possible to complain to the contact person, please email the editor to send complaints.

All complaints will be acknowledged within three working days.

For all matters related to the policies, procedures, editorial content, and actions of the editorial staff, the decision of the Editor-in-Chief will be final. If the Editor-in-Chief is unavailable for any reason, the complaint will be referred to the Executive Editor of the journal.

Complaint Resolution: All efforts will be made to resolve the complaint as quickly as possible. In some cases, a delay in resolution may occur if a response from a third person or organization is required. Until the complaint is resolved, a complaint resolution update will be provided to the complainant every two weeks until the complaint is finally resolved.

Conflicts of Interest Policy: Transparency and objectivity in research are essential for our journals. These principles are strictly followed in our peer review process and decision for publication. Manuscript submissions are assigned to reviewers in an effort to minimize potential conflicts of interest. The following relationships between reviewers and authors are considered conflicts and are avoided: Current colleagues, recent colleagues, recent co-authors, and doctoral students for which the editor served as their committee chair. After papers are assigned, individual reviewers are required to inform the editor-in-chief of any conflicts mentioned in the list above and any other conflicts that may exist.

Copyright and Access: Our journals are Open Access journals, all articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material, provided the original work is properly cited and states its license.  

 This license allows authors and readers to use all articles, data sets, graphics, and appendices in data mining applications, search engines, websites, blogs, and other platforms by providing an appropriate reference (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

 

All individual articles are available to readers without any restrictions. However, although our journal normally works by subscription, in order for the articles to have open access, the author(s) is/are required to pay an article processing charge.

Archiving: RHAPSODE regularly ensures electronic backup of the published articles and website content. All published articles are also archived in the Internet Archive and available for access.

Informed Consent Policy: Author(s) should comply with the following conditions in order to meet ethical and legal standards for work with human subjects:

Participants in your research should be informed that

- you will be conducting research in which they will be the participants or that you would like to write about them for publication.

- until preliminarily review participation is voluntary so that there is no penalty for refusing to participate, and the participants may withdraw at this time without penalty.  After preliminary review, the author is not allowed to withdraw submitted manuscripts because the withdrawal is a waste of valuable resources that editors and referees spent a great deal of time processing submitted manuscripts, money, and works invested by the publisher. If the author still requests withdrawal of his/her manuscript when the manuscript is still in the peer-reviewing process, the author will be punished with paying APC per manuscript as a withdrawal penalty to the publisher.

Participants in your research should be informed about

- what is the purpose of your research and the procedure you will follow in the research?

- contact information that they can reach you for answers to questions regarding the research.

- any foreseeable risks and discomforts involved in agreeing to cooperate.

- any possible direct benefits of participating (e.g., receiving a copy of the article or chapter).

Participants in your research should be informed if and how their confidentiality will be protected.

If you have any questions, please contact us at info@rhapsode.co.uk