About the Journal

Appeals

Editors have very broad discretion in determining whether a submission is an appropriate fit for their journal. Many submissions are declined without external review with a very general statement of the rejection decision. These decisions are not eligible for formal appeal.

If the author believes the decision to reject the submission was not in accordance with journal policy and procedures, the author may appeal the decision by providing the Editor with a detailed point by point response to reviewer and editor comments. The Editor will review the peer review process undertaken for the submission. If the decision was made in line with editorial criteria, the Editor’s decision to reject is final.

Appeals of editorial decisions will only be considered if they are based on evidence that either (1) an editor or reviewer made a significant factual error/a major misunderstanding of a manuscript, or (2) the integrity of the editorial decision making process was compromised. In general, only one appeal per manuscript per decision stage will be considered. For further information on how to appeal, please contact the journal editor.

Authorship

Based on AERA Code of Ethics

Authors must ensure that all who have made a substantive contribution to an intellectual product are listed as authors. Education researchers take responsibility and credit, including authorship credit, only for work they have actually performed or to which they have contributed. Education researchers ensure that principal authorship, authorship order, and other publication credits are based on the relative scientific or professional contributions of the individuals involved, regardless of their status. Education researchers specify the criteria for making these determinations at the outset of the writing process.

Responsibilities of the Author(s)

Authors should ensure that:

their work is original and written by them
their work has not been previously published and has been submitted only to the journal
where material is taken from other sources (including their own published writing) the source is clearly cited and that where appropriate permission is obtained
their work does not infringe on any rights of others, including privacy rights and intellectual property rights
their data is true and not manipulated
their data is their own or that they have permission to use data reproduced in their paper
any real or apparent conflicting or competing interest is clearly stated on submission of their paper (this would include funding assistance)
they adhere to all research ethics guidelines of their discipline, particularly where human or animal subjects are involved
they contact the Editor to identify and correct any material errors upon discovery, whether prior or subsequent to publication of their work
authorship of the paper is accurately represented, including ensuring that all individuals credited as authors participated in the actual authorship of the work and that all who participated are credited and have given consent for publication

Publication Process

In cases of multiple authorship, education researchers confer with all other authors prior to submitting work for publication to JQRME and establish mutually acceptable authorship agreements regarding the submission.

In submitting a manuscript to JQRME, researchers grant that publication first claim to publication except where explicit policies allow multiple submissions. Education researchers do not submit that manuscript to a second publication until after an official decision has been received or until the manuscript is withdrawn. Authors submitting a manuscript for publication in JQRME can withdraw the manuscript from consideration until an official acceptance is made.

Request for anonymity

Authors wishing to publish anonymously must submit a formal request in writing to the Journal Editor, outlining the reasons for their request. Legitimate reasons include personal safety or privacy concerns, or other sensitive circumstances. All requests for anonymity and the reasons for such requests will be treated with confidentiality.

The request will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis by the Journal Editor and Associate Editor in line with established guidance by COPE.

Responsibilities of the Editor

When serving as the editors of JQRME, editors are fair in the application of standards for publication and operate without favoritism or malice. As editors, they are cognizant of any potential conflicts of interest. When serving, the editor of JQRME ensures the confidential nature of the review process and supervises the editorial office staff, including students, in accordance with practices that maintain confidentiality. When serving as editors of JQRME, we are bound to publish all manuscripts accepted for publication unless major errors or ethical violations (e.g., plagiarism or other misconduct) are discovered after acceptance. When serving as editors of JQRME, they ensure the anonymity of reviewers unless they otherwise receive permission from reviewers to reveal their identity. Editors ensure that their staff conforms to this practice. When serving as editors, they ensure the anonymity of authors unless and until a manuscript is accepted for publication or unless the established practices of the journal are known to be otherwise. When serving as journal editors, they take steps to provide for the timely review of all manuscripts and respond promptly to inquiries about the status of the review.

Responsibilities of the Associate Editor

When serving as an associate editor of JQRME, the associate editor works under the guidance of the editor to assist in the fair and efficient management of the journal’s editorial process. They support the editor in applying publication standards consistently and ethically, and they disclose any potential conflicts of interest related to manuscripts assigned to them. Associate editors assist the editor by managing specific portions of the review process. This may include identifying and inviting appropriate reviewers, monitoring the progress of reviews, and ensuring that manuscripts move through the process in a timely manner. They provide written recommendations to the editor based on reviewer feedback and their own assessment of a manuscript’s scholarly quality, clarity, and contribution to the field. Associate editors help the editor maintain the confidentiality and integrity of the peer review process. They safeguard the anonymity of authors and reviewers in accordance with the journal’s policies and ensure that all materials related to submissions remain secure and confidential. In coordination with the editor, associate editors may assist in communicating with authors regarding revisions, reviewer feedback, or decisions. They may also contribute to developing editorial policies, reviewing special issues or invited papers, mentoring student editorial staff, and promoting the journal’s visibility within the research community. When serving as associate editors of JQRME, they act as key partners to the editor, ensuring that the journal operates smoothly, ethically, and in accordance with its mission to advance quantitative research in music education.

Responsibilities of the Reviewers

Reviewers must adhere to the highest ethical standards, including standards of competence, when serving as reviewers for publication. In reviewing material submitted for publication in JQRME, reviewers must respect the confidentiality of the process and the proprietary rights in such information of those who submitted it. Reviewers must disclose conflicts of interest or decline requests for reviews of the work of others where conflicts of interest are involved. The reviewer should only agree to review a manuscript if they have the necessary subject and/or method expertise to provide a proper assessment. If asked to review a manuscript they have previously reviewed, a reviewer must make it known to the editor of JQRME unless it is clear that they are being asked to provide a reappraisal. Reviewers for JQRME must make an effort to return a thoughtful review in a reasonable timeframe.

Additional Reviewer Expectations for JQRME

It is our hope at JQRME to establish from the start a reputation for accurate as well as professional and supportive review process. As we are open to research work at all stages, including pilot work and trials, it is understood that smaller studies will be submitted, potentially by early career researchers. Although reviewers are under no obligation to accept any study that they feel does not rise to a level of acceptance, how this information is conveyed to submitting authors should be carefully considered.

Reviewers are expected to maintain a professional tone in their comments
Reviewers are expected to avoid all ad hominem attacks towards any author or any individual or individuals discussed in a manuscript
Reviewers are expected to keep their comments and suggestions within the scope of the manuscript being reviewed
Reviewers are expected to suspend personal bias as best as possible in their review in order to give as honest and accurate review as possible
Reviewers are expected to ensure their review remains within the scope of the guidelines of JQRME
Reviewers are expected to give feedback that is both clear and constructive

Removal of a Reviewer

Should a reviewer demonstrate ongoing avoidance of the above expectations or ongoing unprofessional behavior, they may be removed from the review process of the manuscript in question immediately, or the editorial board by the editor following one (1) previous censure.

Artificial Intelligence

AI assistance

JQRME recognises that AI assisted writing has become more common as the technology becomes more accessible. AI tools that make suggestions to improve or enhance your own work, such as tools to improve language, grammar or structure, are considered assistive AI tools and do not require disclosure by authors or reviewers. However, authors are responsible for ensuring their submission is accurate and meets the standards for high quality scholarship.

Generative AI

The use of AI tools that can produce content such as generating references, text, images or any other form of content must be disclosed when used by authors or reviewers. Authors should cite original sources, rather than Generative AI tools as primary sources within the references. If your submission was primarily or partially generated using AI, this must be disclosed upon submission so the Editorial team can evaluate the content generated.

Authors are required to follow these guidelines:

Clearly indicate the use of language models in the manuscript, including which model was used and for what purpose. Please use the methods or acknowledgements section, as appropriate.
Verify the accuracy, validity, and appropriateness of the content and any citations generated by language models and correct any errors, biases or inconsistencies.
Be conscious of the potential for plagiarism where the LLM may have reproduced substantial text from other sources. Check the original sources to be sure you are not plagiarising someone else’s work.
Be conscious of the potential for fabrication where the LLM may have generated false content, including getting facts wrong, or generating citations that don’t exist. Ensure you have verified all claims in your article prior to submission.
Please note that AI bots such as ChatGPT should not be listed as an author on your submission.

While submissions will not be rejected because of the disclosed use of generative AI, if the Editor becomes aware that Generative AI was inappropriately used in the preparation of a submission without disclosure, the Editor reserves the right to reject the submission at any time during the publishing process. Inappropriate use of Generative AI includes the generation of incorrect text or content, plagiarism or inappropriate attribution to prior sources. If it becomes clear that AI was misused in the preparation of a manuscript (e.g., incorrect or fabricated references), the editor reserves the right to reject the submission.

Conflicts of Interest

JQRME follows COPE and ICMJE guidance on the declaration of conflicts of interest by authors, reviewers, and editors. A conflict of interest is defined as any direct or indirect interest that might influence the reading, assessment of or conducting of the research reported in the submission. Any interests within a five-year period prior to beginning the research are considered relevant, although authors must disclose interests outside this time frame if they may have influenced the research.

What do authors need to declare?

Financial Interests

Grants from a funding agency, a commercial entity or any type of payment to authors from organisations that are likely to benefit financially from the research
Employment with or affiliation to an organisation that has an interest in the research and/or is likely to benefit from its publication and dissemination
Stocks, shares, patents or patent applications or other forms of financial holdings that are likely to benefit from the publication and dissemination of the research
Consulting fees, reimbursement or any other payments made to authors for conducting the research
Close relatives who may financially benefit from the publication and dissemination of the research

Non-financial

Affiliation to an organisation that will have an interest in the outcome such as members of a research advisory board, steering or advisory committees, associations or honorary affiliations
Membership of organisations or scientific societies that undertake advocacy work
Ideology, beliefs, thoughts, faith relevant to the research topic
Activism or other advocacy work related to the research
Political leanings or legal action relevant to the research or its potential outcome
Research competition, previous personal disagreements, close working relationships with editors, editorial board members
Editorial responsibilities or membership of the editorial board of the journal