Financial Planning Research Journal

Open Access Statement

The journal is an Open Access journal that allows free unlimited access to all its contents without any restrictions upon publication to all users.

Article Processing Charge (APC)

There is no article processing charge for articles accepted for publication in this journal.

Instructions for Authors

Authors should submit complete papers that do not exceed 5,000 words not including the title page, abstract, tables, figures, charts, footnotes and reference list. The word count must be stated on the title page. Papers should be original works that are not published or under review at another journal. Please submit your manuscript using the online portal available on the journal’s web page.

Note: The journal does not have article processing charges (APCs) nor article submission charges. Authors are advised that if submitted papers are accepted for publication in FPRJ, then the authors will be required to complete a copyright assignment form.

Authors may also be requested to provide a 600-word synopsis of the paper for publication in Money & Life magazine.

Other submission requirements:

The title page should include a concise and informative title; the names and affiliations of all authors; the name, mailing address, telephone number, and email address of the author (or corresponding author, if more than one author); word count; and any acknowledgments to those who assisted the authors, in a footnote asterisked to the title. The second page should repeat the title so that papers may be refereed anonymously. No author details should be included on this page.

The second page should also include an abstract and up to five keywords.

The text of the article should begin on the third page.

The abstract (not more than 100 words) should highlight the paper’s relevance to the area of financial planning.

Manuscripts should be submitted in Microsoft Word format, use 1.5 spacing, A4 paper size, 11 point Arial font, 2.5 cm margins on all sides, and be left-aligned (not justified). Number all pages consecutively beginning with the title page.

Non-English words, such as et al., ex-post, ad hoc, per capita, Zeitgeist, or au fait, should be italicised.

Full stops and question marks should be followed by a single space.

Tables and figures should be located at the end of the article. Make it clear where tables are to be inserted in the text, for example, (Table 1 here).

The preferred referencing style is based on the Australian Government Publishing Service (AGPS) Harvard referencing system which utilises an author-date style. Some examples of in-text and reference list elements are outlined below as a guide.

1. In-text citations

In-text citations Ideas and work referenced from other sources are indicated by placing the author’s surname and the date of publication in brackets. If possible, you should also give the page number. When an author has published more than one cited document in the same year, these are distinguished by adding lower case letters (a, b, c, etc.) to the year. For example, Jones (2010a) discussed the subject…

• Single author examples: Teachers help each student with their individual interpretation of understanding (Fetherston 2007, p.61).

Fetherston (2007, p. 61) claims that teachers ‘suggest ways of looking at the new material’

• Two or three authors examples: The advantages of using proxy mode… (Kakadia & DiMambro 2004, p. 80). Douglas, Papadopoulos and Boutelle (2009, p. 11) dispute the claim…
• More than three authors examples: Industry best practice (Beer et al. 2012, p. 54) suggests that…

Beer et al. (2012, p. 54) when discussing industry best practice…

2. Reference list

Place the reference list on a new page at the end of your paper and centre the heading of “References”. List references alphabetically A-Z by first author’s surname. List works with no author under the first significant word of the title and list multiple works by the same author from oldest to newest by date. Add a lower case letter immediately after the year for multiple works by the same author in the same year, for example, (2000a, 2000b, 2000c).

Examples :

• Book—print: Fetherston, T 2007, Becoming an effective teacher, Thomson Learning, South Melbourne.
• Book chapter—print: Sherren, K 2006, ‘Pillars of society: the historical context for sustainability and higher education in Australia’, in W Filho & D Carpenter (eds), Sustainability in the Australasian university context, Peter Lang, Frankfurt, pp. 11- 32.
• Journal article—print: Leonard, V & LeBrasseur, R 2008, ‘Individual assignments and academic dishonesty: exploring the conundrum’, The Australian Educational Researcher, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 37-56.
• Web page: National Library of Australia 2010, About the National Library, National Library of Australia, viewed 30 March 2010, http://www.nla.gov.au.

Peer review process

Articles will be submitted to a double-blind review process by experts in the respective field.

Each submission is acknowledged by the editorial team before pre-selection where the editorial team chooses to either reject the article or to send it to the reviewers for a thorough review. The grounds for immediate dismissal (desk rejection) of a manuscript include poor English expression, plagiarism, or the article being outside scope of journal.

If the article passes pre-selection, then it is sent for peer-review to two experts in the respective field. This stage is expected to take 4-8 weeks, depending on the availability of reviewers. The final decision of the peer-review process includes one of the following:

Accepted with no changes – When the paper satisfies all requirements regarding originality, literature, methodology, theory, contribution to the field, and overall quality.

Accepted with minor changes – Where the paper in its present form, with minor amendments is suitable for publication. The corresponding author receives the decision followed by the suggestions of the peer reviewers and is asked to resubmit their paper after the minor amendments have been addressed.

Accepted with major changes – This indicates the paper shows potential for satisfying the requirements of the journal but needs further elaborate work. The corresponding author will receive the reviewer recommendations and is encouraged to revise the paper in accordance with the reviewer recommendations.

Rejected – These papers have major concerns over the quality of the material presented in the paper and the reviewers consider the paper is not able to be improved to a standard suitable for publication in FPRJ.

Where revisions are required, authors are expected to resubmit their amended papers within a reasonable timeframe as indicated by the revisions required. For example, minor revisions would be expected within 4-6 weeks while major revisions may require longer.

Where major revisions are required, articles may be returned to reviewers for further review and comment. After a second review of the corrected manuscript, a final decision is sent to the corresponding author.

The editors will consult with authors as closely as possible about changes and will make the final decision regarding acceptance of an article for publication.