General guidelines

Intending authors are encouraged to read both the author guidelines (PDF) and the reviewer guidelines (PDF).

Youth Studies Australia welcomes contributions from researchers, academics and postgraduate students on all aspects of Australasian youth.

If you are considering writing a research paper, feel free to contact the editor about your proposed paper.

Author guidelines

The author guidelines can also be downloaded as a PDF document.

Youth Studies Australia welcomes papers on all aspects of youth. See the journal's subject index for a list of general subject areas and a list of specific topics that are currently high priority. The journal aims to present youth issues and research in a way that is accessible and reader-friendly, but which retains scholarly integrity. All papers are reviewed internally, then peer-reviewed if they pass internal review.

• qualitative research
• quantitative research
• literature reviews
• descriptions and/or evaluations of programs and practices
  

• consider the wide readership and keep the writing style straightforward and accessible
• do not include statistical formulas in the text. An endnote can direct readers to the authors for more technical information
• avoid the use of long quotations and specialist academic jargon
• limit word length to 4,000 words (including references, tables and headings)
• supply the manuscript in Word™ with no more than three levels of headings
• consult the Style manual: For authors, editors and printers (5th or 6th edition) on issues of style
• limit references for any group citation to no more than four or five
• format paper, including references and citations, as outlined in the YSA style guide. Papers that do not conform to the guide will be returned to the authors for reformatting prior to review.
  
• use a minimum number of tables and figures, and include raw data so they can be recreated by the Youth Studies Australia compositor
• include a short abstract, and, for each author, a short biographical statement, name, affiliation, mailing address, phone number, fax number and email address
• read the information regarding the peer review process.
  To minimise the possibility of rejection at the internal review stage, authors should be familiar with these factors and also with the Youth Studies Australia style before submitting their work.

Submission conditions

• Submission of a manuscript implies commitment to publish in the journal.
• YSA will not consider manuscripts that have been simultaneously submitted to another journal.
• Manuscripts should not have been published elsewhere in substantially similar form or with substantially similar content. Authors in doubt about what constitutes prior publication should contact the editor.
• Copyright of manuscript text, as submitted to Youth Studies Australia, remains with the author. Youth Studies Australia holds the copyright for the typeset and graphically designed version as it appears in the journal and for any electronic or hard copy reproduction by the Publisher, Australian Clearinghouse for Youth Studies, based on that version.
• ACYS reserves the right to collect copying fees. Anyone requesting permission from ACYS to reprint papers will be required to seek the author's permission as well as the permission of ACYS.
• A minimum turnaround time of four months is required for the review process. Papers may be submitted at any time of the year as a continuous review process is used.
  

Reviewer guidelines and report

The reviewer guidelines and report can be downloaded as a PDF document.

Youth Studies Australia aims to provide up-to-date research and practice information for people working in the youth field. Youth Studies Australia encourages authors to communicate to a wide, often non-academic, audience. Papers that have been peer reviewed for Youth Studies Australia may therefore differ in appearance and length from those in traditional scholarly journals, but must nevertheless meet similar criteria.

Contributors are asked to write to a word length of no more than 4,000 words (including references and headings); therefore, background reading and the methodology or "science" need to be summarised very succinctly. Authors are encouraged to focus on findings, discussion, implications and recommendations. While the authors' demonstration of knowledge of the literature is very important, it need not be unnecessarily expansive. The space available should be used to "advance" knowledge of the issue or subject; with common knowledge accepted as "given".

Reviewers are asked to complete the templates in the YSA reviewer guidelines and report (PDF document) while considering the following factors:

1. the originality of the material,
2. the appropriateness of approach and design,
3. the policy implications and/or relevancy of the material, and
4. the effectiveness of figures and tables¹.

Reviewers may also make specific comments on the manuscript. We ask reviewers not to correct deficiencies in style or mistakes in grammar, but they are encouraged to identify any unclear, repetitive or ambiguous passages, and any need to reorganise content or condense particular passages. After peer review, if the paper is accepted, the manuscript will be edited for style, grammar, spelling and construction by YSA editorial staff.

We use a 'blind' review system in that the author is not identified to the reviewers and the reviewers are not identified to the author. However, anonymous reviewer comments may be forwarded to the author(s). If you wish to direct comments to the editor only, please include a separate note labelled 'For the editor only'.

We ask reviewers to distinguish between revisions considered essential and those considered desirable. In addition, because editorial decisions are usually based on evaluations derived from several sources, reviewers should not expect the editor to act on every recommendation. Please note that the decision to accept or reject a paper will be made by the in-house editorial team.

If reviewers suggest revision, you may be asked to check the revised paper.

1: Sections of this document have been adapted from the Health Care Financing Review.

Further information for reviewers and two templates for reports is supplied in the Reviewer guidelines and report (PDF document).