Author Submission Guidelines

 

Introduction

 

Counselling, Psychotherapy and Health (CPH Journal) is an international, interdisciplinary, peer-reviewed, open-access, on-line journal devoted to providing leadership in counselling, psychotherapy, and health related research, inquiry, professional, and scholarly debate. CPH Journal is the official research journal of the Australian Counselling Association (ACA). The international Editorial Board is made up of a wide range of academics, practitioners, researchers, senior honorary advisors, and includes postgraduate student representation. The Board represents counselling, psychotherapy and health related disciplines in a way that reflects diversity, and respects time-honored editorial autonomy, independence, and non-sectarian views.

 

Our Guiding Values

 

The Editorial Board is committed to an equitable reviewing approach that offers assistance to writers and researchers through a systematic and supportive review of material. Our goal is to encourage writers and when appropriate to recommend publication. Articles published in CPH Journal must in some way address, or be seen to complement, our guiding values. These values form part of the criteria for editorial peer review, and will be reflected in judging the appropriateness of articles for the journal. Our guiding values include:

·         The highest standards of ethics in research

·         Innovation and exploration

·         Sound research methods and designs

·         Scholarly and accessible non-technical language

·         Cross-(multi)-disciplinary methods and implications

·         Professional and personal practitioner development

·         Respect for ecosystems including planetary, local environments, families, relationships and social systems

·         Cultural diversity, safety and healing/reconciliation

·         Mentoring and life-long learning

·         Holistic and integrative approaches

·         Equity in research

·         Support of minority issues

Although CPH Journal cannot guarantee submissions will be recommended for publication we endeavor as far as possible to assist authors to improve themselves and their texts. The goal of this approach is to help authors develop their ideas by working collaboratively with reviewers’ comments, which will aim to assist authors to bring out the best in their work. The qualities of the editorial relationship that we support include encouragement, respect and collaboration.

Types of Articles Accepted

 

Articles accepted for CPH Journal fall into the following categories:

 

  1. Original research in counselling and/or psychotherapy, and the use of counselling and/or psychotherapy in allied health fields;

 

  1. Original research in allied health that addresses implications for counselling and/or psychotherapy practice, training, policy, or professional discourse;

 

  1. Original research addressing some aspect of the Guiding Values of CPH Journal;

 

  1. Case studies, where ethical methods of data collection have been applied;

 

  1. Critical discussions, reviews, and debates regarding the relevance to practice of existing research studies;

 

  1. Papers that address conceptual issues related to practice in counselling and/or psychotherapy directly, or those that are related to the use of counselling and/or psychotherapy in allied health fields (i.e. philosophical, theoretical, political, sociological, historical, structural, critical);

 

  1. Studies related to the cultural, historical, and social contexts of emerging practices;

 

  1. Papers that address methodological, moral, and/or ethical issues impacting on the practice of counselling, psychotherapy, and health.

 

Requirements for Copy

 

  1. Copy must be accessible and readable, and will present in a simple, clear, grammatically sound and direct style of English. As CPH Journal is published open-access to both public and professional readerships, articles must reflect a non-technical and non-jargon language, and include a small table of technical terms where these cannot be avoided. Articles must inspire readers to continue reading, and so need to be both scholarly and of human interest.

 

  1. Copy will comply with non-discriminatory and non-sexist language conventions.

 

  1. Copy will be typed, single spaced, left justified only, all 12-point font size including headings, and saved as an electronic file in Microsoft Word or rich text format (rtf) only.

 

  1. The body of the article will include a header or footer on every page with the title of the manuscript and the date of submission, with page numbers on every page. The body of the article must not include any identifying details of the author(s).

 

  1. The author(s) will need to download and fill in the form ‘Author Submission Form’ and submit this form in addition to the file containing their article as described above. The form will be used to record author(s) details and the administration of the review process from start to finish.

 

  1. All articles (regardless of their focus or format) will contain an abstract describing the content of the article. Abstracts will be 150 words or less.

 

  1. All tables and figures should be numbered and presented on the top of a new page in the text where they appear. Illustrations originated by the author(s) are accepted as digital reproductions only in jpg format.

 

  1. Written permission from copyright holders must be obtained by the author for any illustration, table, or quote of more than 100 words published elsewhere.

 

  1. Articles may be between 800 to 10,000 words in length. Where an article is of exceptional merit, up to 15,000 words may be considered.

 

  1. For articles that exceed 15,000 words, the article must report an original and major research study (defined as a study that exceeds two years in duration). The author(s) are asked to write directly to the Editor in Chief with a maximum 800 word proposal/letter detailing the reason why they wish to submit a lengthy article, and how this will benefit the readership of CPH Journal.

 

Referencing

 

Articles submitted to CPH Journal will use the (Author/Date) system, also known as the Harvard System of referencing, or the American Psychological Association (APA) format. An example follows.

 

The following Harvard excerpts are taken from:

 

Bowers, R. & Minichiello, V. (2001) A review of homosexuality: Changes over time. In Wood, C. (Ed), Sexual Positions: An Australian view, Hill of Content, Melbourne, 131-155.

 

Even while taking a balanced view of his social context, Freud’s writings reveal what is now considered bias and prejudice.  For example, he believed that women were more primitive than men, and that they had a ‘greater proneness... to neuroses and especially to hysteria’ (in Friedman, 1998:250). His theory of female development supported these claims (Freud:1933). He believed that the Oedipus complex was biologically determined and universal (Freud: 1924; Freud: 1940). In Freud's view, failure to resolve this developmental challenge led to psychopathology. Had Freud had the concept of homophobia, this conclusion would have been totally different.  The end result was that his theory led to reinforcing the pathologising of a misunderstood experience.

 

‘As a society,’ says Silverstein, (1991:103), ‘we train people to suffer. We decide which behaviors are acceptable, we tell people they are deviant, we stigmatize and oppress them, and when they come to us unhappy about themselves, we tell them to get treatment.’ No one can argue that counselling happens within socio-historical contexts. It may also be assumed that the views and values of counsellors are shaped by their social upbringing and reshaped or reinforced by their education.

 

 

 

 

Harvard References:

 

Freud, S. (1924) The dissolution of the Oedipus complex. Standard Edition, 19, 73-79.

 

Freud, S. (1933) Femininity. Standard Edition, 22, 112-135.

 

Freud, S. (1940) An outline of psychoanalysis. Standard Edition, 23, 144-207.

 

Friedman, R. and Downey, J. (1998) ‘Psychoanalysis and the model of homosexuality as psychopathology: A historical overview’ The American Journal of Psychoanalysis, 58(3), 249-270.

 

Silverstein, C. (1991) ‘Psychological and medical treatments of homosexuality’ in Homosexuality: Research implications for public policy, (Eds), Gonsiorek J and Weinrich, J, Sage, London.

 

Procedures to Submit

 

  1. Prepare the manuscript as described above;

 

  1. Save the file in Microsoft Word or Rich Text Format (rtf) – a function of MS Word and most other major word processing packages, including WordPerfect, AbiWord, OpenOffice and so forth;

 

  1. Download and fill in the form ‘Author Submission Record CPH Journal’;

 

  1. Open your email window, and put in the subject heading ‘Re: Article for CPH Journal’;

 

  1. Attach the two files to the email (manuscript and administrative form);

 

  1. Send your email to "ACA" aca@theaca.net.au with “CPH Journal Submission” in the header;

 

Copyright Agreement

 

  1. The Author (understood to mean the Principle Author whose sole responsibility it is to properly administer this agreement on behalf of any and all co-authors) hereby assigns to CPH Journal (hereafter known as the Publisher) the copyright to the Contribution named above; whereby the Publisher shall have the exclusive international rights to publish in any and all media the said Contribution and translations of it wholly or in part throughout the World under the provisions of this agreement. These rights include without limitation mechanical, electronic and visual reproduction; electronic storage and retrieval; and all other forms of electronic publication or any other types of publication including all subsidiary rights.

 

  1. Any and all publication by the Publisher of author’s work in any form or media is agreed by the author to be undertaken without regard for notification or permission by the author, and at the sole discretion of the Publisher.

 

  1. All publishing rights consigned to the Publisher continue indefinitely, however, after no less than three years from the date of first publication by the Publisher authors may continue to publish their work in any form or media under the following terms and conditions.

 

  1. Authors agree to not publish their submission in any form for a period of at least three years from the date of first publication in the Journal, after which authors are free to publish submitted material with an acknowledgement reading, ‘This article was first published in Counselling, Psychotherapy, and Health, Vol [ ], Issue [ ].’ This acknowledgement can be attached to the end of the author’s subsequent publication of the work, and under these conditions no notification to the Journal is necessary.

 

  1. Prior to publication, authors are asked to certify that their work is submitted only to the Publisher and has never been published before under any form.

 

  1. The Author guarantees that the Contribution is original, has not been published previously, is not under consideration for publication elsewhere, has been properly acknowledged and/or referenced, and that any necessary permission to quote from another source has been obtained. (A copy of such permission should be sent with this form if applicable.)

 

  1. The Author declares that any person named as co-author of the Contribution is aware of the fact and has agreed to being so named, and has made a substantive contribution to the work.

 

  1. Any and all co-authors are bound by the same agreement

 

The Review Process

 

No submissions are rejected after one review. A minimum of two reviews of an article occur before CPH Journal elects to reject a submission. Our intention is twofold. On one hand, we intend to publish only high quality work that upholds professional standards. On the other hand, we hold firm to values of mentoring and encouraging of authors, and open debate on issues regardless if they conflict with our opinions. Therefore, our publication does not gain its merit by rejection rates. Rather, we see our role as extending the window of opportunity for author’s work to be considered for publication.

From time to time, changes to editorial policy and procedure are necessary to attend to quality improvements. If such changes influence existing articles under review, authors will be appropriately notified.

The possible outcomes of the review process are:

(i)                  Minor revisions with recommendation to publish;

(ii)                Major revisions with recommendation to improve the draft towards publishing via submitting the revised draft for a second review based on adherence to prior suggestions;

(iii)               Extensive revisions with recommendation to improve the draft without recommendation to publish at this stage of manuscript development via considering gaining the assistance of a senior academic mentor;

(iv)              Extensive revisions without recommendation to publish; or

(v)               The rejection of the manuscript, after the protocol above has been addressed.

Resubmission of Rejected Manuscripts

 

In cases where manuscripts are rejected after going through the above protocol, authors may elect to resubmit extensive revisions of previously rejected work up to a maximum eighteen months from the date of the rejection of the manuscript. The author will provide copies of all prior drafts, and documentation to the Editor-in-Chief. Authors are also asked to send a cover letter documenting their reasons for asking the Journal to reconsider the manuscript and how they have met the expectations from prior reviews. The Editor-in-Chief will consider the request. Based on the Editor’s discretion, they will either reject the request with written justification of their rationale to the author, or they will elect a review of the piece. In either case, the Editor’s decision is final. The results of a possible review will also be final, and will only consist of either (i) acceptance, or (ii) rejection, with no recourse for anything but minor revisions. Authors should keep in mind that the timeline involved in revision may be a factor in publication, and that long-delayed revisions should incorporate literature that appears in the intervening time so as to maximize the currency of the article.

 

Editing of Manuscripts

 

Once a manuscript is received at administration, the Microsoft Word or rich text format (rtf) file containing the manuscript is opened. The table below is inserted. An administrative code is inserted to assist in tracking the manuscript through the review process. We include this information so that authors are informed about the questions reviewers will consider while evaluating the manuscript.

 

 

Dear Author:

This table is inserted into your article submitted to CPH Journal. All editing will be tracked in this file. For the review process to proceed smoothly, author(s) must be prepared to receive critical and supportive comments about their work.  Indeed, constructive criticism itself is one of the most supportive and most important parts of the review process.  On the other hand, reviewers endeavour to make their comments supportive, constructive, informative, and mentoring. You will understand that reviewers must be free to assess and to discuss the weaknesses and strengths of the article. While we acknowledge the challenging parts of the review process for authors, we also appreciate your openness to receiving whatever comments come forward from reviewers.  Thank you again for submitting your article to CPH Journal.   – The Editor in Chief

Article No:

 

Date of Submission:

 

Title:

 

Editor/Associate Editor overseeing review process:

 

Reviewer’s Summary (comments will appear throughout the manuscript)

1: Briefly highlight three positive aspects and/or strengths of this article. (The box will expand as you type).

 

2: Briefly highlight three negative aspects and/or weaknesses of this article.

 

3: Does this article address and/or reflect in some way one or more of our Guiding Values listed below? Delete either yes or no, leaving your answer here: Yes   No

 

BOLD the values highlighted below:

·         The highest standards of ethics in research

·         Innovation and exploration

·         Sound research methods and designs

·         Scholarly and accessible non-technical language

·         Cross-(multi)-disciplinary methods and implications

·         Professional and personal practitioner development

·         Respect for ecosystems including planetary, local environments, families, relationships and social systems

·         Cultural diversity, safety and healing/reconciliation

·         Mentoring and life-long learning

·         Holistic and integrative approaches

·         Equity in research

·         Support of minority issues

4: What is your overall recommendation regarding this article? Please BOLD YOUR ANSWER:

 

(1) Minor revisions with recommendation to publish

(2) Major revisions with recommendation to improve the draft towards publishing via submitting the revised draft for a second review based on adherence to prior suggestions.

(3) Extensive revisions with recommendation to improve the draft without recommendation to publish at this stage of manuscript development via considering gaining the assistance of a senior academic mentor

(4) Extensive revisions without recommendation to publish

(5) The rejection of the manuscript, after the protocol above has been addressed.

Comment (if applicable):

 

Editing Using Track Changes

 

Although we attempt to use the current word processing technology in our review process, technology is every changing so you may elect to type traditional review comments.

 

In your returned manuscript you may find two types of feedback. One type that you may see includes edits and/or suggestions for grammar, academic style corrections for compliance, spelling changes, etc. The second thing you will notice is balloons in the margins (or comments in a pane at the bottom of your screen) of your paper that contain the locations and suggestions for clarification, expanded explanations, and additions to what you have written.

 

We are including the software steps you can take to view and make the changes to your paper that will allow us to track the entire sequence upon resubmission. Please use this document to continue working if possible. Then return this document to us with all of your changes, and the string of comments for our review.

 

Using Microsoft Word to Edit and Review Manuscripts

 

The following are the steps you will use to edit and review the papers you receive as Manuscript Consultants:

 

  1. Click on the View menu and click on the Print Layout tab. This will enable you to view the changes you make in the manuscript.

 

  1. Click on the View menu and click on Tool Bar tab and then click the Reviewing tab so that the Reviewing option is selected. This will enable you to use the Track Changes and Insert Comments tools with the manuscript.

 

  1. Click on the Tools menu, click Options, and then click the User Information tab. In the Name and Initials boxes, type the name and initials you want to use in the changes and comments you make in the manuscript.

 

  1. To begin to track the changes you make as you edit the manuscript, move your cursor to the Reviewing toolbar and click on the Track Changes icon. The Track Changes icon appears as a white document page with red lines with a bright star or asterisk on the upper right hand corner and yellow pencil located at the lower right hand side. When the Track Changes feature is turned on, you will notice the TRK letters in the box at the bottom of the computer screen appear in a black colored font. Once this option is turned on, every deletion, insertion, and correction you make to the manuscript will be recorded. This will allow you to create an audit trail for the editors and authors to read and review.

 

  1. To turn off the Track Changes feature, move your cursor to the Reviewing toolbar and click on the Track Changes icon again. When the Track Changes feature is turned off, you will notice the TRK letters in the box at the bottom of the computer screen no longer appear in the black colored font. With the Track Changes feature turned off, you can then delete changes that had been made in the manuscript by using the Delete or the Backspace key.

 

  1. To insert a new Comment, place the cursor on the position in the manuscript to which the Comment is being directed, then click on the Insert Comment icon located on the Reviewing Tool Bar. The Insert Comment icon is a picture of a yellow folder with a bright star or asterisk on the upper right hand corner of the yellow folder. Depending on the version of Word you have, you will have the option of writing your comment in a Comment balloon that appears in the right hand margin of the manuscript or in the Comments windowpane that appears at the bottom on the computer screen. In some versions of Word, you can use both display options.

 

  1. To delete a Comment of your own, you can place your cursor on the Comment in the text or on the Comment balloon located in the right hand margin, then click the right button on your mouse and then click on the Delete Comment tab. In older versions of Word, the Comment will appear as a portion of text highlighted in yellow. You can also place your cursor on the Comment in the text or on the Comment balloon located in the right hand margin you wish to delete and then move your cursor on the Delete Comment icon located on the Reviewing Tool Bar and then click the left button of your mouse to delete the Comment. The Delete Comment icon is a picture of a yellow folder with a red X located on the upper right hand corner of the yellow folder. Please note that the Delete Comment icon can only be used if you have placed your cursor on the Comment you wish to delete.

 

  1. To edit a Comment of your own, you can place your cursor on the Comment in the text, then click the right button on your mouse and then click on the Edit Comment tab. You can also place your cursor on the Comment in the text you wish to edit and then move your cursor on the Edit Comment icon located on the Reviewing Tool Bar. The Edit Comment icon is a picture of a yellow folder with a yellow pencil located on the middle of the yellow folder.  Once you have clicked either the Edit Comment icon with the left button of your mouse or the Edit Comment tab with the right button of the mouse, the Comment windowpane will open at the bottom of the screen. Move the cursor to the Comment windowpane and click the left mouse button on the Comment you wish to edit. You can then begin to edit the Comment. If you are using a version of Word that has the Comment Balloon option, place your cursor on the Comment balloon located in the right hand margin you wish to edit and click the left mouse button. You can then begin making your edit. Depending on your version of Word, you can edit the Comment in the Comment balloon or in the Comment windowpane. Please note that the Edit Comment icon can only be used if you have placed your cursor on the Comment you wish to edit.

 

  1. To receive additional help or pointers with using these Microsoft Word editing and reviewing features, please access Word’s Help resource or email one of the Editors for further assistance.

 

Publishing

 

Upon offer to publish, author(s) will be required to sign an agreement for publication, which will be completed and faxed to administration. This agreement will include copyright components, author permission and indemnity clauses relevant to publication with CPH Journal. Before the publication of the article, author(s) will receive proofs for checking. At this point, no substantial changes can be made.

 

Notes

 

CPH Journal wishes to gratefully acknowledge the following sources which assisted in developing these guidelines. These resources were accessed during September 2004.

 

Counselling and Psychotherapy Research, Instructions for Authors, http://cpr.bacp.co.uk/authors.html

 

Counselling Australia, Contributor’s Guide, internal publication.

 

Journal of Integrative Psychology, Submitting Articles, http://www.integrativepsychology.org/submit.html

 

The Qualitative Report, Using Microsoft Word to Edit and Review Manuscripts copied with permission, internal publication. We gratefully acknowledge that the inspiration for our mentoring approach came from TQR and their innovative vision. http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR

 

University of New England, Academic Skills Office, Teaching and Learning Centre, The Author-date System, http://www.une.edu.au/aso/referencing_style_guide.htm