Author Guidelines

Preparation of Manuscripts

Basic guidelines are below. Final Manuscript Preparation Guidelines will be sent to authors whose submissions are accepted.

TCR welcomes all types of quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods methodologies, as well as conceptual articles.

Considerations for Quantitative Manuscripts

  1. Please follow the APA Style Journal Article Reporting Standards (JARS-Quant).
    1. Review the current JARS-Quant guidelines: https://apastyle.apa.org/jars/quantitative
    2.  Use Table 1 of the JARS-Quant guidelines to assist with the preparation of quantitative manuscripts: https://apastyle.apa.org/jars/quant-table-1.pdf

Considerations for Qualitative Manuscripts

  1.     Please follow the APA Style Journal Article Reporting Standards (JARS-Qual).
    1.     Review the current JARS-Qual guidelines: https://apastyle.apa.org/jars/qualitative
    2.     Use Table 1 of the JARS-Qual guidelines to assist with the preparation of qualitative manuscripts: https://apastyle.apa.org/jars/qual-table-1.pdf

Considerations for Mixed Methods Manuscripts

  1.     Please follow the APA Style Journal Article Reporting Standards (JARS-Mixed).
    1.     Review the current JARS-Mixed guidelines: https://apastyle.apa.org/jars/mixed-methods
    2.     Use Table 1 of the JARS-Mixed guidelines to assist with the preparation of mixed methods manuscripts: https://apastyle.apa.org/jars/mixed-table-1.pdf

Considerations for Commentaries/Conceptual Manuscripts

  1. Conceptual articles are not literature reviews. While they do include a review of the scholarly literature, these articles also*:
    1. Provide new theoretical perspectives or integrate existing theoretical views
    2. Address innovative procedures or techniques
    3. Discuss current professional issues or professional development
    4. Offer well-reasoned responses to previously published articles
  2. All conceptual articles should include these elements*:
    1. Introduction
    2. Purpose Statement
    3. Review of the Literature
    4. Presentation of New Concepts or Positions
    5. Discussion
    6. Implications for Counseling
    7. Conclusion
  3. Evaluating conceptual articles is often more difficult than evaluating traditional empirical manuscripts, as conceptual articles do not follow the same structure as empirical studies (e.g., introduction and hypotheses, data collection, and analysis, etc.). When reviewing conceptual articles, please consider:
    1. The logic of the arguments made by the author(s)
    2. The value the article adds to the literature. In other words, does the article identify an important analytic issue?
    3. Whether the author(s) present clear implications
    4. The relevance, importance, and timeliness of the topic
  4. * Watts, R. (2011). Developing a Conceptual Article for Publication in Counseling Journals. Journal of Counseling & Development, 89. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6678.2011.tb00094.x

    Considerations for Systematic Literature Reviews

    1. Systematic literature reviews (SLRs) include all literature associated with a study question. SLRs should include peer-reviewed publications, dissertations, white papers, industry/trade articles, and other sources.
    2. Authors should clearly and thoroughly describe their methods to ensure a comprehensive search of the literature was conducted. Inclusion and exclusion criteria should be provided.
    3. Please use the PRISMA 2020 Checklist when reviewing and providing feedback for SLRs: http://prisma-statement.org/prismastatement/checklist.aspx
    4. For additional guidance, please consider using the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions: https://training.cochrane.org/handbook/current

    *Pati, D. P., & Lorusso, L. N. (2018). How to write a systematic literature review. Health Environments Research & Design Journal, 11(1), 15-30.

    Considerations for Program Evaluation Reviews

    1. Program evaluation review manuscripts include a structured report used to determine if a program has met its goals.
    2. Evaluation of program evaluations include both the type of evaluation that is being conducted (formative, summative, or both) and the evaluation model to support it. It is highly recommended to conduct an evaluation checklist to determine if the program needs to be evaluated or not (see https://wmich.edu/sites/default/files/attachments/u350/2014/program_metaeval_short.pdf for an example). Additionally, it is recommended to apply an evaluation model (see https://poorvucenter.yale.edu/CIPP for an example.) It should also include:
      1.     Clearly define the rationale for why the program is being evaluated (e.g., who wants to know? who are the stakeholders?) .
      2.     Clearly define the problem being evaluated.
      3.     Clearly state the purpose of the evaluation (e.g., why are you evaluating it?).
      4.     Identify the intended audience that will receive results and findings (e.g., stakeholders, decision-makers).
      5.     Describe the evaluator(s) and their role(s) (e.g., who is doing the evaluation?).
      6.     Describe the evaluation model used and why it is the best fit to answer the evaluation questions.
      7.     Describe the major characteristics of the program.
      8.     Describe any design constraints encountered (e.g., lack of access to necessary parties or information).
      9.     Describe the purpose of the selected data collection method (e.g., frequency and manner of data collection).
      10.     Describe how the data collection and analysis matches the evaluation model.
      11.     Provide step by step details regarding the data collection and analysis.
      12.     Describe the logic model used, if applicable.
      13.     Describe the sample size.
      14.     Identify the questions asked in the data collection.
      15.     Describe the results and recommendations based on the evaluation question. Include the importance of the findings, and their impact on stakeholders and on the profession.

      Adapted from: Journal of Public Health, https://www.jphsc.org/index.php/JPHSC/ReviewerGuidelines; Packer-Muti, B. (2020). Multiple considerations in program evaluation. Nova Southeastern University presentation.

    APA Style

    All manuscripts submitted to TCR should be formatted per the recommendations and guidelines set forth by the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.).


    Manuscripts should not exceed 30 double-spaced pages, including the title page, abstract, references, appendices, tables, and figures. Manuscripts that exceed this length will be returned without review. Manuscripts must be in 12pt Times New Roman font, double-spaced, with 1-inch margins on all four sides. 

    Title Page

    Please do not include any identifying information on your manuscript title page. A separate supplemental file labeled “title page” should be submitted containing:

    • A concise and informative manuscript title
    • The name(s) of the author(s)
    • The affiliation(s) of the author(s)
    • Contact information of the corresponding author, including full mailing address, city, state, zip code, and email
    • If available, the 16-digit ORCID of the author(s)
    • Any acknowledgments, disclosures, or funding information 


    Please submit a 150 to 250-word abstract on page 2 of your manuscript. The abstract should include the purpose of the research, the study sample size and characteristics, the measurement instruments used, and the conclusions.

    Following the abstract on page 2, authors should list three to five keywords that are carefully selected based on the manuscript's content. These keywords will be used for indexing purposes.

    Ethics Approval

    For research involving human participants, authors should include a statement that confirms that the study was approved (or granted exemption) by the appropriate institutional and/or national research ethics committee (including the name of the ethics committee). If a study was granted an exemption from requiring ethics approval, this should also be detailed in the manuscript (including the reasons for the exemption). For all research involving human subjects, freely given, informed consent to participate in the study must be obtained from participants (or their parent or legal guardian), and this should be stated in the manuscript.

    References and In-Text Citations

    TCR requires all references and in-text citations to be formatted per the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.). Reference lists should have 1/2 -inch hanging indents and be listed in alphabetical order.

    Figures, Tables, Images, and Artwork

    All figures, tables, images, and artwork should be formatted per the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.). There should be a maximum of four figures, tables, images, and artwork. Color art is free of charge for online publication. Do not embed figures, tables, images, or artwork within the body of the manuscript. These should be placed on a separate page following the reference list.

    Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Belonging

    TCR supports equity, diversity, inclusion, and belonging (DEIB) in its practices. Manuscripts should not include discriminatory language regarding gender, sexual orientation, racial and ethnic identity, disabilities, and age. Please see APA Style Inclusive Language Guidelines here: https://www.apa.org/about/apa/equity-diversity-inclusion/language-guidelines.pdf


    To give people of all abilities and disabilities access to the content of your figures, images, and artwork, please ensure:

    • All figures, images, and artwork have descriptive captions 
    • Patterns are used instead of or in addition to colors to convey information 

    Funding Information

    If your research was funded and you have funding requirements such as the National Institutes of Health requirement to deposit articles in PubMed Central, please be sure to submit a funding acknowledgment in the following format: 

    • The sentence should begin: “This work was supported by . . .” 
    • The full official funding agency name should be given, e.g., “National Institutes of Health,” not “NIH.” 
    • Grant numbers should be given in brackets as follows: [grant number xxxx] 
    • Multiple grant numbers should be separated by a comma as follows: [grant numbers xxxx, yyyy] 

    Footnotes or Endnotes

    Please do not use footnotes or endnotes. All information should be incorporated within the body of the manuscript.

    Statements and Declarations

    Authors must disclose financial or non-financial interests that are directly or indirectly related to the work submitted for publication.

    Revised Manuscripts

    When submitting your revised manuscript, please include a response letter addressing the reviewer's comments.

    Manuscript Submission

    Ethical Responsibilities of Authors

    Submission of a manuscript to TCR implies that the content is original and has not been published elsewhere (partially or in full). Additionally, the manuscript should not be submitted to more than one journal for simultaneous consideration.

    Results should be presented clearly, honestly, and without fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate data manipulation. 

    No data, text, or theories by others are presented as if they were the author’s own (‘plagiarism’). Proper acknowledgments to other works must be given. Important note: the journal may use software to screen for plagiarism.

    Permissions and Approvals

    Authors wishing to include figures, tables, or text passages that have already been published elsewhere are required to obtain permission from the copyright owner(s) and to include evidence that such permission has been granted. 

    Authors should ensure they have permission to use software, questionnaires/surveys, and measurements in their studies.

    Submission of a manuscript to TCR implies that its publication has been approved by all co-authors, if any, as well as by the responsible authorities at the institute where the work has been carried out.

    Editorial Procedure

    Double-blind Peer Review

    TCR follows a double-blind reviewing procedure. This means the author will remain anonymous to the reviewers throughout the peer review. It is the responsibility of the author to anonymize the manuscript and any associated materials. Manuscripts that are not anonymized will be returned without review.

    • Author names, affiliations, and any other potentially identifying information should be removed from the manuscript text and any accompanying files (such as figures of supplementary material).
    • A separate Title Page should be submitted, containing the title, author names, affiliations, and contact information of the corresponding author. 
    • Authors should avoid citing their own work in a way that could reveal their identity.

    Data Validation

    Upon request, authors should be prepared to send relevant documentation or data to verify the validity of the results presented. This could be in the form of raw data, samples, records, etc. Sensitive information in the form of confidential or proprietary data is excluded.

    Accepted Manuscripts

    Authors will receive information for submitting a final copy of their manuscript upon acceptance. All authors will be expected to submit final, fully executed copyright release forms when their manuscript is accepted. Page proofs for review will be sent to the corresponding author only via e-mail.


    The International Association for Resilience and Trauma Counseling (IARTC) shall own the copyright of the original and any renewal term for any writing that is published by IARTC. The author of any such writing shall have the right to make a non-profit or non-commercial use of the work, provided that there be affixed to each copy the copyright notice used by IARTC when the writing was first published. The author shall have the right to make or authorize the profit or commercial use of any such writing only after first obtaining the written consent of IARTC.