Publication Ethics and Editorial Policies

The OeJS only publishes original research articles. All articles undergo a double-blind peer review process. Our principles are based on the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (rev. ed. 2023) and reflect the  COPE Core Practices.

As an Open Access journal, we adhere to the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing. In addition, the OeJS is committed to the  Ethical Principles for Educational Research of ÖFEB of 2017 (website in German).

    • Peer Review Process

      The OeJS makes decisions on the publication of articles in a two-stage review process with preliminary and final selection:

      Stage 1: pre-selection of proposals by the Editors

      In the Call for Papers, the OeJS first invites submissions of expressions of interest. The abstracts for articles (approx. 4,000 characters) are reviewed by the Editors on the basis of the following quality criteria: (1) original research contribution, (2) reference to the focus call (for articles on the main topic of the issues), (3) relevance and intention of the contribution, (4) methodological approach. All authors whose abstracts fulfil these criteria will be invited to submit a full manuscript (up to 50,000 characters).

      Proposals for book reviews (approx. 10,000 characters) can be accepted if the books (a) either have a clear connection to the main topic of a call for papers, or (b) have a connection to Austria in terms of content, or (c) are of great importance for the current national and/or international discourse in the field.

      Stage 2: decision to publish articles and book reviews

      All articles undergo a double-blind peer review process. For each manuscript received, the OeJS obtains expert opinions from at least two colleagues from the national and/or international scientific community. Reviewers must have proven expertise in the respective subject area. The reviews are prepared on the basis of a partially standardised questionnaire. This also contains a reasoned recommendation for the acceptance or rejection of a publication. If reviewers suspect or identify a ‘conflict of interest’, they must inform the editors of the OeJS immediately. If this is confirmed there, a replacement reviewer will be appointed.The Editors make their final decision on the basis of these reviews. In addition, at least one person from the editors’ group reviews each contribution using the same criteria as in the questionnaire. Publication decisions are made by consensus. All submitters receive the anonymised, qualified assessments of the external reviewers. In addition, they receive binding instructions if minor or major revisions need to be made to the manuscript in order for the contributions to be published, if applicable. In the event of a revision, the Editors check whether the changes have been taken into account. On this basis, the final decision is then made as to whether a revised article will be published or finally rejected.

      The manuscripts of book reviews do not undergo a double-blind peer review. However, their content is assessed by the editors, who then decide by consensus whether to publish the article. If a revision is necessary, the procedure is analogous to the review process for articles (see above).

    • Ethical Issues Concerning Research Practices

      The OeJS follows the  European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (pp. 11-12) regarding the following aspects:

      – Anyone accused of research misconduct is presumed innocent until proven otherwise.

      – Investigations of the Editors are fair, comprehensive, and conducted expediently, without compromising accuracy, objectivity, or thoroughness.

      – The parties involved in the investigation declare any conflict of interest that may arise during the investigation.

      – Measures are taken to ensure that investigations are carried through to a conclusion.

      – Investigations are conducted confidentially in order to protect those involved.

      – Persons accused of research misconduct are given full details of the allegation(s) and are allowed a fair process for responding to allegations and presenting evidence.

      The final evaluation and decision about measures are taken by the Editors based of the collected data and an additional external blind-review. The involved person will be informed about the process and foreseen timelines.

    • Intellectual Property

      By submitting a manuscript, authors assure the Editors of the OeJS that the publication has not yet been published or is being offered for publication elsewhere. All rights are transferred to the publisher Beltz Juventa, which is fully authorized to exploit the material. Any further requests for use should therefore be directed to Beltz Juventa.

      Neither the Editors nor the authors of the OeJS receive a remuneration. At the same time, Beltz Juventa publishes the OeJS electronically Open Access under the  Creative Commons licence  CC BY NC ND. This means that authors and any other person can reproduce and redistribute the material in any format or medium, provided that the conditions of this licence are met (BY = Attribution, ND = Non-commercial, NC = No Derivative Works).

      The OeJS does not charge any publication costs (no Article Processing Charge, APC for short).

    • Post-Publication Discussions and Corrections

      The OeJS is guided by the  COPE Core Practices (CCP) when dealing with  Complaints and Appeals and regarding  Post-Publication Discussions and Corrections. If it is necessary to check whether a publication needs to be retracted, the journal applies the  COPE Retraction Guidelines, which are part of the formal COPE policy. The summary of the Retraction Guidelines, which sets out the decision criteria and defines how the retraction of a publication is to be indicated, is binding.