Information For Authors

RIED makes two annual calls for papers: 1st) From June 2 to December 1, and 2nd) From December 2 to June 1 of the following year. For official entry purposes, each article will be considered as December 1 (for the number published in July) and June 1 (for the number corresponding to January) of each year. Immediately afterwards, the evaluation processes of the articles will officially begin (not before). Therefore, it is recommended to submit articles to RIED only during the months of May and November of each year. When there is a call for a Special Issue, these articles may partially or totally occupy the content of the RIED number. Check this circumstance.

Before submitting an article, it is mandatory to review the About the Journal section, especially the Code of Ethics on Publication and Misconduct. This includes the Ethical Code of Duties for Authors, which represents a committed and consented declaration of everything stated therein. No article should be submitted to RIED if any single point of this Ethical Code is violated.

Authors must review and apply the Author Guidelines and know our Requirements and Evaluation Criteria and our Priority Criteria for the selection of articles. And finally, review the Preliminary and Scientific Evaluation Forms, as well as adhere to our format template. All authors must have an updated ORCID. The failure to fulfill any of the required parametres may be enough reason to reject the submission.

Important! We extract and highlight from our Information for Authors some of the requirements that at first reading are cause to reject an article:

  • Does not fit enough the focus and scope of RIED or the interests and topic of this call, if there is one..
  • The work is not relevant, timely, or current, or it is anticipated to generate little interest among readers and scholars of RIED.
  • The title is of little interest or is confusing, does not correspond to the content of the article, or does not invite reading.
  • Authors. When submitting the article (anonymous), not all the authors appear on the platform (journal website), in the correct order in which they will appear in the final work, or any of them is not fully identified: name, surname, institutional email, institution, country, ORCID and a brief biographical note (30-50 words). No subsequent changes will be accepted in terms of adding, removing, or changing the order of the authors.
  • The abstract is low quality, not clear, has weak structure, or does not provide an accurate idea of the content of the work. The translation of the abstract is not at a professional/academic level.
  • There is a poor compliance with the requirements of the RIED template: formal aspects, length of title (up to 16 words) , abstract (200-250), keywords (from 3 to 6 descriptors)  or complete work (5000-7000 words excluding bibliographic references), as well as the format of citations, references, tables, graphs and images, etc.
  • It shows little foundation or is of a poor quality (literature review or state of the art), not supported by sources or citations/references that are: pertinent, relevant, sufficient, varied and current. The same criteria apply for the sections: discussion, contrast, comparison of results with other works, etc.
  • It is limited to very specific case studies; refers to a single course, subject or discipline or deals with a single academic period.
  • If applicable, it relies on a small, uninteresting population or a poorly representative or incorrect sample.
  • There are deficiencies in the data collection instruments, techniques, or procedures, or in their interpretation and analysis. The work has weaknesses in its validity, reliability, contrast, generalization, replicability, etc.
  • It applies a less solid or rigurous study methodology.
  • It is not current or innovative or reiterates themes, objectives, hypotheses, results, conclusions, etc., that are similar to others already published. It is not original or contributes little to the advancement of scientific knowledge.
  • It is basically descriptive or simply shows results from a survey or questionnaire, with pertinent comments and little else, deviating from scientific evidence, contrast, etc.
  • There is a lack of coherence or order between the research design, title, abstract, keywords, objectives, methodology, results, discussion, or conclusions.
  • The results, discussion, or conclusions are irrelevant.
  • The work displays shortcomings in its structure, reasoning, implementation of specialized terminology, arrangement, composition, or grammatical style.
  • It veers away from the level of university studies or shows experiences that are challenging to reproduce or implement in the university.
  • A phrase or paragraph stemming from plagiarism or self-plagiarism has been detected (unappealable rejection). Be careful with texts generated by artificial intelligence.
  • It does not meet APA-7 Standards.
  • The translation into the second language presents deficiencies.
  • Finally, starting from Vol. 27(2), and given the abundance of articles focused on systematic reviews that are reaching RIED, we are forced to limit the number of those published on that topic. Only those of exceptional quality, well-justified, grounded, and with foreseeable impact would be published.

Important information to self-assess your article, before submitting it to RIED, SEE HERE.

Authors need to register with the journal in order to submit, or if they are already registered they can simply login and start the 5-step process.

If you meet all the requirements and it was decided to submit an article to RIED, click HERE.