Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Interdisciplinary, religious-psychological, philosophical, ethical, and intercultural approach to religious and religious phenomena.

Section Policies

Άρθρα

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Monographs

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

Review Policy for THEOPHANY
Purpose: The purpose of this review policy is to outline the guidelines and procedures for the review process of submissions to THEOPHANY. The journal aims to publish high-quality scholarly articles that contribute to the field of Psychology of Religion, ensuring rigorous and fair evaluation.
Peer Review Process: 2.1. Initial Evaluation: All submitted manuscripts will undergo an initial evaluation by the editorial team to assess their alignment with the journal's scope, format, and quality standards. Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be rejected at this stage.
2.2. Double-Blind Peer Review: Accepted manuscripts will then proceed to the double-blind peer review process. The editorial team will select expert reviewers with relevant expertise in the manuscript's subject matter. Reviewers will evaluate the manuscript's originality, methodology, clarity, and contribution to the field.
2.3. Reviewer Selection: Reviewers will be selected based on their expertise, reputation, and absence of conflicts of interest. The identity of the authors and reviewers will remain confidential throughout the review process.
2.4. Reviewer Recommendations: Reviewers will provide constructive feedback, recommendations, and suggestions to improve the quality of the manuscript. They will assess the manuscript's strengths, weaknesses, and suitability for publication in THEOPHANY.
2.5. Decision Making: Based on the reviewers' recommendations, the editorial team will make a decision regarding the manuscript. The possible decisions include acceptance, acceptance with minor revisions, major revisions, or rejection. The final decision will be communicated to the authors along with the reviewers' comments.
Timelines: The journal strives to maintain a timely review process. Authors can expect to receive a decision on their manuscript within two months from the date of submission. However, the actual duration may vary depending on factors such as reviewer availability and the complexity of the manuscript.
Confidentiality: The journal and its reviewers will treat all submitted manuscripts with utmost confidentiality. Reviewers are expected to maintain the confidentiality of the reviewed materials and not disclose any information about the manuscript to any third party.
Appeals and Ethical Considerations: Authors have the right to appeal against a decision if they believe it was made based on unfair grounds. The journal will handle appeals in a fair and unbiased manner, considering the concerns raised by the authors. Additionally, the journal adheres to ethical guidelines and expects authors to maintain the highest standards of integrity and academic honesty.

Open Access Policy

THEOPHANY is committed to the principles of open access, aiming to promote the widespread dissemination of knowledge and ensure the accessibility of scholarly research to the global community. This Open Access Policy outlines the journal's approach to open access publication.

Open Access Publication: THEOPHANY provides immediate, unrestricted, and free online access to all published articles, promoting the broadest possible dissemination of research findings. Readers are granted the right to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles, without any subscription or paywall barriers.

Licensing: All articles published in THEOPHANY are made available under an open license, typically Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY), which allows for maximum reuse and distribution as long as appropriate credit is given to the original authors and the source.

Copyright Transfer: Upon submission of an article to THEOPHANY, the copyright for the article is transferred to the journal. THEOPHANY becomes the copyright holder, which allows the journal to manage the dissemination and preservation of the work effectively while still ensuring open access.

No Publication Fees: THEOPHANY is committed to providing a completely free publishing experience. There are no article processing charges (APCs), submission fees, or any other costs associated with publishing in the journal. This policy ensures that financial constraints do not hinder the dissemination of valuable research.

Archiving and Preservation: THEOPHANY supports the archiving and long-term preservation of published articles. The journal may deposit its content in recognized digital repositories or archives to ensure its availability and accessibility over time.

Ethics and malpractice statement

1. Introduction

This journal is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all possible measures against publication malpractice. Our Ethics and Malpractice Statement is based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers. All parties involved in the publishing process—authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher—are expected to adhere to these ethical standards.

2. Duties of the Editors

2.1 Publication Decisions
The editors are responsible for deciding which of the submitted articles should be published. The decision is based on the paper's importance, originality, clarity, and relevance to the journal's scope. Current legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism are also considered.

2.2 Fair Play
Manuscripts are evaluated solely on their intellectual content, without regard to the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.

2.3 Confidentiality
Editors and editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

2.4 Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

3. Duties of Reviewers

3.1 Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists the editors in making editorial decisions and may also serve the author in improving the paper through the editorial communications.

3.2 Promptness
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editors and excuse themselves from the review process.

3.3 Confidentiality
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editors.

3.4 Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

3.5 Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editors' attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

3.6 Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

4. Duties of Authors

4.1 Reporting Standards
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

4.2 Data Access and Retention
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

4.3 Originality and Plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

4.4 Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

4.5 Acknowledgement of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

4.6 Authorship of the Paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

4.7 Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

4.8 Fundamental Errors in Published Works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

5. Duties of the Publisher

5.1 Editorial Autonomy
The publisher is committed to working with editors to define clearly the respective roles of publisher and of editors in order to ensure the autonomy of editorial decisions, without influence from advertisers or other commercial partners.

5.2 Intellectual Property and Copyright
The publisher protects the intellectual property and copyright of the authors, the journal and the publisher by promoting transparency in publishing agreements.

5.3 Scientific Misconduct
In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum, clarification or, in the most severe case, the retraction of the affected work.

6. Peer Review Process

This journal operates a double-blind review process. All contributions will be initially assessed by the editor for suitability for the journal. Papers deemed suitable are then typically sent to a minimum of two independent expert reviewers to assess the scientific quality of the paper. The Editor is responsible for the final decision regarding acceptance or rejection of articles. The Editor's decision is final.

7. Publication Ethics

7.1 Publication and Authorship
An author is an individual who has significantly contributed to the development of a manuscript. The journal expects all authors to have significantly contributed to the research and article preparation. All authors must disclose any affiliations that may be perceived as potential conflicts of interest in the research.

7.2 Responsibilities of Authors
Authors are obliged to participate in the peer review process and cooperate fully by responding promptly to editors' requests for raw data, clarifications, and proof of ethics approval, patient consents, and copyright permissions. Authors should be aware that the journal screens for plagiarism and publishes corrections when necessary.

7.3 Responsibilities of Reviewers
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviews should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that authors can use them for improving the paper.

7.4 Responsibilities of Editors
The editors are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.

8. Publishing Ethics Issues

8.1 Monitoring/Safeguarding Publishing Ethics
The editors and publisher will take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred. In no case shall the journal or its editors encourage such misconduct, or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place.

8.2 Retractions, Corrections and Expressions of Concern
The editors and publisher are committed to maintaining the integrity of the academic record. We publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed in accordance with COPE guidelines.

8.3 Dealing with Unethical Behavior
Unethical behavior may be identified and brought to the attention of the editor and publisher at any time, by anyone. Whoever informs the editor or publisher of such conduct should provide sufficient information and evidence in order for an investigation to be initiated. All allegations should be taken seriously and treated in the same way, until a successful decision or conclusion is reached.

9. Copyright and Access

The journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

10. Archiving

The journal ensures long-term digital preservation through partnerships with trusted digital archives. All content is preserved in these archives, ensuring that it remains available in the event of journal termination.

Aims & Scope

THEOPHANY: Aims and Scope

THEOPHANY aspires to establish itself as a preeminent forum for the dissemination of high-caliber research in the multifaceted field of Psychology of Religion. Our primary objective is to catalyze the advancement of knowledge by publishing innovative and impactful scholarly work that significantly contributes to the understanding, development, and application of the intricate interplay between psychological processes and religious phenomena.

The journal's scope encompasses a broad spectrum of topics within the Psychology of Religion, welcoming original research articles, comprehensive reviews, and other pertinent contributions. THEOPHANY seeks to explore the rich tapestry of religious-psychological intersections through various lenses and methodologies. We encourage submissions that employ rigorous empirical approaches, advance theoretical frameworks, provide novel empirical insights, or offer innovative perspectives within this dynamic field.

At the core of THEOPHANY's mission is the exploration of interdisciplinary perspectives. We actively solicit research that examines the complex interplay between religious and psychological domains, delves into the philosophical and ethical dimensions of religious experience, conducts cross-cultural comparisons, and undertakes psycho-historical analyses. This interdisciplinary approach allows for a more comprehensive understanding of the multifaceted nature of religious phenomena and their psychological underpinnings.

The journal places significant emphasis on diverse psychological approaches to the study of religion. We welcome contributions that utilize cognitive psychological frameworks to elucidate religious cognition and behavior, employ philosophical and phenomenological perspectives to explore the lived experience of faith, apply existential and psychoanalytic interpretations to religious phenomena, investigate the humanistic and personalistic dimensions of spirituality, examine spiritualistic and biopsychological aspects of religious experience, conduct behavioristic and narrative inquiries into religious practices, and explore the emerging field of neurotheology.

THEOPHANY recognizes the crucial role of sociocultural contexts in shaping religious experiences and their psychological manifestations. As such, we encourage submissions that investigate national and cultural influences on religious psychology, explore folkloric traditions and practices, consider applied and normative aspects of religion, examine the social and clinical implications of religious beliefs and behaviors, and analyze political and noological perspectives on religious phenomena.

The journal also places great importance on experiential and developmental studies within the Psychology of Religion. We seek contributions that explore environmental and contextual influences on religious development, apply developmental psychological frameworks to religious growth, conduct linguistic and semiotic analyses of religious discourse, and investigate parapsychological phenomena related to religious experiences.

Furthermore, THEOPHANY acknowledges the significance of denominational and systemic approaches in understanding religious psychology. We welcome research that examines denominational variations and practices, applies systemic and relational perspectives to religious communities, investigates devotional and spiritual experiences, and explores psychotherapeutic applications of religious and spiritual concepts.

THEOPHANY aims to serve as a vibrant platform for researchers, scholars, practitioners, and policymakers to share their findings, exchange ideas, and engage in critical discussions. By fostering collaboration and facilitating the dissemination of knowledge, we strive to contribute significantly to the advancement of the Psychology of Religion as a field of study and practice.

We extend an invitation to researchers and experts from academia, industry, and other relevant sectors to submit their original work to THEOPHANY. All submissions undergo a rigorous peer review process, ensuring adherence to the highest standards of scholarly quality and integrity. Through this commitment to excellence, THEOPHANY aspires to play a pivotal role in shaping the future of research and practice in the Psychology of Religion.

Guidelines for Special Issues

Special issues play a pivotal role in the landscape of academic publishing, offering a unique platform for the in-depth exploration of specific themes, emerging research areas, or interdisciplinary topics within a field. These focused collections of articles serve not only to advance current knowledge but also to catalyze new research directions, making them an invaluable component of scholarly discourse. The process of developing a special issue, from initial conception to final publication, requires careful planning, rigorous academic standards, and close collaboration between guest editors and the journal's editorial team.

The journey of a special issue begins with the submission of a comprehensive proposal by prospective guest editors. This proposal should be a detailed document that outlines the vision and scope of the proposed special issue. It must include a suggested title that encapsulates the theme, accompanied by a brief yet informative curriculum vitae of the proposed guest editor or editors. A crucial component of the proposal is a persuasive rationale that elucidates the significance of the special issue for the journal and its readership. This rationale should articulate the relevance of the chosen topic to the journal's aims and scope, its potential impact on the field, and the timeliness of the subject matter in the context of current academic discourse.

In addition to the conceptual framework, the proposal should provide practical details that demonstrate the feasibility and potential success of the special issue. This includes a preliminary list of potential contributors, which helps to gauge the level of interest and expertise that the special issue might attract. An outline of the proposed timeline is also essential, delineating key milestones such as the submission deadline, the duration of the review process, and the anticipated publication date. This timeline allows the journal's editorial board to assess the practicality of the proposal within the context of their publication schedule.

Upon receipt of a special issue proposal, the journal's editorial board undertakes a thorough evaluation process. The assessment criteria are multifaceted, encompassing the alignment of the proposed theme with the journal's mission, the scientific merit and novelty of the topic, the qualifications and expertise of the guest editors, the potential for attracting high-quality submissions, and the feasibility of the proposed timeline. This comprehensive evaluation ensures that only proposals with the highest potential for academic impact and success are accepted.

The managing editor plays a crucial role in facilitating communication between the proposing guest editors and the editorial board. Within a period of four to six weeks following the submission, the managing editor will convey the board's decision to the prospective guest editors. This decision may take one of three forms: outright acceptance, a request for revisions to strengthen the proposal, or rejection accompanied by constructive feedback. This process ensures that even if a proposal is not accepted, the prospective guest editors receive valuable insights that can inform future submissions.

Upon acceptance of a special issue proposal, the focus shifts to the development and dissemination of a call for papers. This stage requires close collaboration between the guest editors and the journal's managing editor to craft a comprehensive and appealing invitation for submissions. The call for papers should articulate the thematic focus of the special issue, outline key research questions or areas of interest, provide clear submission guidelines and deadlines, and offer contact information for inquiries. The dissemination of this call is a critical step in ensuring the success of the special issue. Guest editors are encouraged to leverage various channels, including relevant academic mailing lists, social media platforms, direct outreach to potential contributors, and promotion at pertinent conferences and workshops.

Concurrent with the call for papers, guest editors should begin preparing an introductory article for the special issue. This introduction serves multiple important functions: it provides a theoretical framework for the collection, contextualizes the included papers within the broader field, highlights key themes and findings across the contributions, and identifies potential directions for future research. This introductory piece is crucial in tying together the diverse contributions and presenting a cohesive narrative for the special issue.

The editorial standards and procedures for special issue submissions are designed to maintain the high academic quality associated with the journal. All manuscripts must be submitted through the journal's online submission system and undergo a rigorous double-blind peer review process. While guest editors may suggest potential reviewers, the final selection rests with the journal's editorial team to ensure impartiality. The review criteria encompass the originality and significance of the contribution, methodological rigor, clarity of presentation, and relevance to the special issue theme.

Quality control measures are paramount throughout the process. The journal's standard quality benchmarks apply unequivocally to all special issue submissions. The editorial board reserves the right to reject individual papers that do not meet these standards, request additional revisions or reviews as necessary, and, in extreme cases, cancel the special issue if an insufficient number of high-quality papers are received. These measures ensure that the special issue maintains the journal's reputation for excellence.

The production and publication phase involves close cooperation between the guest editors and the journal's production team. Accepted papers undergo copyediting and typesetting according to the journal's standards, with authors given the opportunity to review proofs before final publication. Depending on the journal's publication schedule and the number of accepted papers, the special issue may be published as a single volume or across multiple issues.

The responsibilities of guest editors extend beyond the publication of the special issue. Post-publication promotion is crucial in maximizing the impact and reach of the collected works. Guest editors are encouraged to collaborate with the journal's marketing team to promote the special issue, consider organizing symposia or conference sessions based on the theme, and explore opportunities for further development of the research area, such as edited books or follow-up special issues.

In conclusion, the development of a special issue is a complex but rewarding process that contributes significantly to the advancement of academic knowledge. By adhering to these comprehensive guidelines, prospective guest editors can navigate the journey from initial proposal to final publication, ensuring the creation of a valuable and impactful collection of scholarly works.