*free versions of the JACC may be considered upon request.
JACC Editorial Board
Mark Mann, Ph.D.
Texas Woman's University, USA.
Specialty Area: Collaborative Action Research and Athlete Centered Coaching.
Lynn Kidman, Ph.D.
Auckland University of Technology, New Zealand.
Specialty Area: Task Constraints and Athlete Centered Coaching.
Ron Davis, Ph.D.
Texas Woman's University, USA.
Specialty Area: Disabled Sport and Athlete Centered Coaching.
Gretchen Kerr, Ph.D.
University of Toronto, Canada
Specialty Areas: Athlete Welfare, Athlete-Cenetred High-Performance Sport and Coaching
David Brown, Ph.D.
The University of Tulsa, USA.
Specialty Area: The Use of Technology & Science for Sport in Athlete Centered Coaching
The International Perspectives on Athlete Centered Coaching (IPACC) Conference
Date: July, 2016.
Location: Park City, Utah. Site of the USA Winter Olympic Training Center.
Focus: International Perspectives on Athlete Centered Coaching.
Highlights from the 2015 IPACC Conference (Mérida and Cozumel, Mexico. August 15-22, 2015.)
CALL FOR PAPERS
Call for Papers for the 2017 Publication of the Journal of Athlete Centered Coaching (The JACC).
Submission Deadline: September 15, 2016: Please Submit Manuscripts to: firstname.lastname@example.org
Publication Date: February 1, 2017.
Along with participation in the Harvard University Dataverse, The JACC is in the process of being registered with the Directory of Open Access Journals.
JACC Editorial and Publishing Process
The JACC has adopted the Open Journal Systems (OJS) Editorial and Publishing Process. The JACC is published using a Double Blind Review (see below), and has adopted MarkLogic.Com as the publication development platform of choice for http://jacc.summit.edu/.
*adapted from the author guidelines of http://education-inquiry.net/
Preparing for submission Manuscripts submitted to jacc.summit.edu should strictly follow the specifications below:
A manuscript submitted to the journal should not have been previously published, and should not be under consideration elsewhere.
In his/her covering letter, the corresponding author should reveal whether the submitted article - or very similar work - has been previously published, or is under consideration elsewhere.
Please note that the submitting author will be the principal contact for editorial correspondence, throughout the peer review and proofreading process, if applicable.
Regular articles should be between 6000-7000 words, excluding references, abstract and acknowledgements.
Plagiarism Detection iThenticate checks submissions against millions of published research papers, and billions of web content. The JACC uses iThenticate to screen all submissions for plagiarism before publication, but authors, researchers and freelancers can also use iThenticate to screen their work before submission by visiting http://research.ithenticate.com
Language All articles should be written in English - British or American as long as consistency is observed. SI units should be used. Please subject the manuscript to professional language editing before submitting the final version if you are not a native speaker.
Conflict of interest and funding Authors are responsible for disclosing all relationships that could be viewed as potential conflicts of interest.
Publication fee: Publishing in http://jacc.summit.edu/ is free of charge.
Manuscript layout Wherever possible, the paper should follow the traditional layout. Begin each section, including figure and table legends, on separate sheets; insert running page numbers. To facilitate the review process, please provide a complete manuscript, preferably a PDF file including all figures, tables, legends and supplementary material (if applicable) placed at the end of the manuscript after the reference list. Microsoft Word, RTF or WordPerfect document file formats are also acceptable.
Title page Organize the title page in the following way: 1) title of manuscript, 2) name of author(s), 3) name of department(s) and institution(s), 4) email addresses of all authors (listed by authors' initials), and 5) name and full postal and email address of the corresponding author who also acts as 'Guarantor' for all parts of the paper, and 5) author biographies (three to five lines of text) for each author. Please observe that the journal adheres to a 'double blind' review process and thus the title page revealing the identity of the authors should be uploaded separately.
The title should be informative and accurate and at the same time trigger the interest of the reader. A short running head will be derived from the title to appear on each page of the article.
Abstract: Articles must include an abstract of 150 - 200 words providing sufficient information for a reader to be able to decide whether or not to proceed to the full text of the article. After the abstract, please give 5 key words; avoid using the same words as in the title.
Section headings: Please do not number section headings. Use a maximum of three levels of headings made clear by orthographic indicators, i.e. capitals, italics, bold etc.
Figures: Upon acceptance please supply figures/graphics/images in at least 300 dpi. For further information please see guidelines. If the figures/graphics/images have been taken from sources not copyrighted by the author, it is the author's sole responsibility to secure the rights from the copyright holder to reproduce those figures/graphs/images for both worldwide print and web publication. All reproduction costs charged by the copyright holder must be borne by the author. When figures/graphics/images are reproduced, a parenthesis should be added to the figure legend thus: (Reproduced with permission from xxx.)
References system: http://jacc.summit.edu/ applies the Harvard reference system. You will find exhaustive guidelines here:
As part of the submission process, authors are required to check off their submission's compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.
By checking off the sub-items below #1-7 you formally take responsibility for the guarantees given therein and may be held accountable for any breach thereof. Note that this procedure is instead of, but just as valid as, signing the agreement on paper.
I, the submitting author, shall be the point of contact throughout the peer review and proofreading process (if applicable).
I, the submitting author, warrant that I am authorized by all co-authors to submit this version of the manuscript and to be their spokesperson during the review process and beyond.
I, the submitting author, warrant that this manuscript – or a very similar version – has not previously been published, or is under consideration elsewhere.
I, the submitting author, warrant that the submitted manuscript is original, and that neither it nor any illustration or supplementary material, or any part thereof, are in any way in violation of any existing original or derivative copyright.
I, the submitting author, warrant that the submitted manuscript contains nothing obscene, indecent, objectionable or libelous according to generally accepted norms.
I, the submitting author, warrant that any interests that might impair the credibility of the manuscript are disclosed in the cover letter to the Editor, which letter may be uploaded at the same time as the manuscript.
I, the submitting author, warrant that I and my co-authors shall indemnify and hold harmless Co-Action Publishing and the Umeå School of Education as to warranties and representations of the author's ownership, originality, or similar breaches. Such indemnification shall last beyond publication of the article, as well as extend to all related claims.
I/we have strictly followed the Author Guidlines and made sure that:
References are in in accordance with journal style.
URLs to online references are provided and ready to click.
All references mentioned in the Reference list are cited in the text, and vice versa.
All tables and figures are referred to in the text.
Abbreviations in tables and figures are explained in the table notes and figure captions.
The text has not been justified; a ragged right-hand margin has been used.
Only one space has been entered after the full-stop at the end of a sentence.
A double hyphen (--) has been used to indicate a dash in text.
TAB has been used when indenting paragraphs or separating columns in tables.
Italics or ‘single quotes’ have been used for emphasis (avoid using underlines).
The same elements have been keyed in exactly the same way throughout the manuscript.
No tables, figures and legends have been uploaded separately. On the contrary, I/we have provided a complete manuscript PDF-file, with all tables, figures, legends and supplementary material (if applicable) placed at the end of the manuscript, following the references.
Only the cover letter and title page will be supplied separately, during step four of the submission process.
►Double blind review
The journal adheres to a 'double blind' review process and thus the identity of the authors should remain unknown.
The authors of the document have deleted their names from the text, with "Author" and year used in the references and footnotes, instead of the authors' name, article title, etc. The title page revealing the identity and biographies of the authors is uploaded separately.
With Microsoft Office documents, author identification should also be removed from the properties for the file (see under File in Word), by clicking on the following, beginning with File on the main menu of the Microsoft application: File > Save As > Tools (or Options with a Mac) > Security > Remove personal information from file properties on save > Save.
With PDFs, the authors' names should also be removed from Document Properties found under File on Adobe Acrobat's main menu.
►Peer Review Process
Before the beginning of the refereeing process, manuscripts go through screening by Editors. At this stage manuscripts may be rejected directly by the Editors if judged to be out of scope for the Journal, or if scientifically or linguistically sub-standard.
Manuscripts that have successfully gone through the screening stage are then sent out for review electronically, and all correspondence takes place via e-mail. Although the peer review process is accelerated by the use of electronic communication, traditional, high-quality peer-review standards are applied to all manuscripts submitted to the journal.
Each manuscript is sent to at least two independent referees. The JACC has a 'double blind' review process: Authors are not told who reviewed their paper, and reviewers are not told who wrote the paper. The peer referees’ identity remains unknown to the authors although it is up to the referee if he/she wants to contact the author at a later stage and reveal his/her identity, after a paper has been published.
Peer reviewers are asked to give their opinion on a number of issues pertinent to the scientific and formal aspects of a paper, and to judge the papers on grounds of originality, quality of empirical work and argument, quality of research methodology or/and argumentation (for non-empirical papers) and quality of language of writing. In addition, for all submitted manuscripts, non-discriminatory language is mandatory. Sexist or racist terms should not be used, and their presence will result in immediate rejection by the Editors. All relevant information will be forwarded to the author(s).
Peer reviewers will have the following possible options, for each article:
1. Accept manuscript (i.e. no need for any revision)
2. Accept after minor revision (i.e. accepted if the author makes the requested small revisions)
3. Accept after major revision (i.e.in such cases the paper will be sent out for another peer review round)
4. Reject manuscript (i.e. if the manuscript is substandard)
The final decision on accepting the paper and the recommendation to the author(s) rests with the Editors.
When asking for revisions, reviewers have two possible goals: to ask authors to tighten their arguments based on existing data or to identify areas where more data are needed. Even formal revision may be required if the language or style is sub-standard. To facilitate rapid publication, authors are given a maximum of 3 months for revision. After 3 months, revised manuscripts will be considered new submissions.