When a writer tries to pass off someone else's work as their own, it is called plagiarism. Manuscripts found to contain plagiarised material are rejected without further review, and the corresponding author's institution may be notified.

All submissions are screened before they are sent to reviewers. Quoted material must be attributed; paraphrased material must be cited.

When an author reuses significant portions of their own published work without properly citing their sources, it is known as duplicate publication, or self-plagiarism. This includes salami-slicing — adding small amounts of fresh data to an earlier work and presenting it as new — and publishing the same paper in several journals, whether concurrently or in sequence.

Every named author must have contributed to the work and must confirm their authorship. Exactly one author is designated corresponding author; co-authors receive an email to confirm participation when the manuscript is submitted.

We solicit submissions that are unique, innovative, contemporary, integrative, and practice-oriented, articulated in a manner that is readily accessible to a worldwide audience. Theoretical, empirical, and action-oriented research is all in scope. Manuscripts should be submitted as PDF, DOC, or DOCX (maximum 25 MB), with an abstract of no more than 3,000 characters and author names and affiliations removed from the manuscript file. Issues are published each June and December.

Submissions are first screened for scope and plagiarism, then assigned to reviewers by subject area with identities withheld on both sides. Each manuscript is scored against twelve evaluation criteria along with written comments, and the executive board issues the decision to the corresponding author.

Manuscripts under review are confidential and may not be shared, cited, or used by reviewers for any purpose outside the review itself. Reviewers must decline any assignment where a conflict of interest exists, and must score only the criteria they are qualified to judge — marking the remainder N/A rather than guessing.

Decisions are issued as accept, needs revision, or reject. An author may appeal a rejection once, in writing to the principal contact, on grounds of factual error in the review.