Information for Authors

Versions for the Double-Blind Peer Review

Please send us all contributions (i.e. general articles and articles on the main topic) in two versions in MS Word format:

  • version with the name of the author(s)
  • version in anonymized format (blind version)

Please make sure that you have removed all properties from the blind version that allow conclusions to be drawn about your identity or organization.

  • Names and organizational affiliations must be deleted from the document properties.
  • Citations that refer to your own work must be replaced, for example with “Author 1”, “Author 2” etc.
  • All references to the authors must be removed from the bibliography.

Instructions on how to safely remove personal information by reviewing documents can be found on Microsoft’s information page  here.


Scope of Contributions

All articles should have a length of 40,000 to 50,000 characters (excluding the abstract, including spaces and the bibliography). Book reviews should not exceed 10,000 characters (including spaces and bibliography). Textbook reviews should not exceed 6,000 characters.


Formatting

The files should be submitted in MS Word format:

  • As little formatting as possible, as few footnotes as possible
  • 2-line spacing, Times New Roman 12pt, pages numbered consecutively
  • Number headings consecutively (1., 1.1., 1.1.1.) and bold
  • British English
  • Citations (short reference in the text) and bibliographic information according to the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA), 7th edition, 2019.
  • Short versions:  APA Style and Grammar Guidelines,  APA Style Blog

Abstract, Keywords and Author Details

  • Abstract in English (min. 600 to max. 1,000 characters including spaces; no references or quotes)
  • 5 bis 7 keywords
  • Please submit your author details, including your email, in a separate document

Review Process

The OeJS only publishes original contributions. Your contribution will be subject to a double-blind peer review by two international experts. The editors also carry out a qualified assessment of each article.

In accordance with international scientific standards, at the end of the review process we will send you the overall result with the following content:

  • [1] Acceptance recommended
  • [2] Acceptance recommended after minor revision (re-reviewed by editors)
  • [3] Fundamental revision (possibly accepted after further review by editors)
  • [4] Rejection

You will also receive the comments of the two reviewers and the editors.

In the event of a revision, we ask for a detailed explanation of how you respond to the comments or an explanation as to why you may reject a comment (rebuttal). Please highlight your changes in color in revised texts.

Reviewers can request confirmation of their service to the journal from the editorial office at .