Instructions for Authors

Authors’ Use and Presentation of Articles

Editor Transitions and Manuscripts in Process

Corrections and Retractions

Copyright and Permissions

Acceptance Criteria

Reporting Standards


Conflicts of Interest

Confidentiality/Privileged Information

Statistical Consultation

Mentoring Individual Doctoral Students

Just Accepted and Newly Published

Open Access

Previously Published Works/Republication of Works With Limited Circulation

Editing Corrections


Bias-Free and Person-First Language


Authors’ Use and Presentation of Articles

ASHA recognizes the importance of authors’ use of their work in furthering the scholarship and research. Although a copyright transfer is signed by authors at submission, authors should be aware that they retain many rights for noncommercial use of the material. Express permission for use is required only in circumstances stipulated on the copyright transfer form.

Classroom Teaching

Authors may use the final published article in classroom teaching and similar academic settings, provided that the recipients are made aware that the material is copyrighted and is not for further dissemination. An article provided for classroom use must include a link to the Web address of the journal in which it has been published (or is to be published).

Personal Websites and Institutional Repositories

Authors may post on their personal web sites, on department or university intranets, or in university repositories, the final, accepted manuscript along with the abstract from the final, published article when available, provided that the publication information (including the Web address of the journal site) is provided as applicable.

Presentation of the Work

Authors may present their accepted manuscripts orally in whole or in part and may use elements of the accepted manuscript as needed to support the presentation.

Reproduction, Re-publication, and Dissemination: Authors may, for professional purposes, make copies of the final, published article, provided that copyright is attributed and that no commercial use is made of the material. Authors may share by e-mail the PDF file of the final, published article for the purpose of dissemination to professional colleagues. Authors may also reuse in their own future works, without permission from ASHA, tables and figures from their article, provided that a full bibliographic citation is provided, including the Web address of the ASHA journal in which the article was originally published.

Editor Transitions and Manuscripts in Process

Manuscripts that have not received a final decision at the time of an editor transition (this typically occurs on November 15 of the final year of an editor’s term) will continue the peer review process under the same associate editor and reviewers wherever possible, to preserve consistency.

Corrections and Retractions

The following types of corrections are used by ASHA to help preserve the accuracy, reliability, and permanence of the scholarly record.

Erratum: A correction of any sort. ASHA has in the past made a distinction between a correction notice and an erratum. The former was for errors made by the production office but not of a substantive nature, and the latter was for substantive errors made by either the author or the production office. In keeping with guidelines from National Library of Medicine, this distinction is no longer made by ASHA. An error is an error, and its correction will take the form of an erratum regardless of its source or characteristics.

Retraction: Rejection or disavowal of published work because of fraud, plagiarism, ethical breaches, or other such scientific malfeasance, or because one's work is rendered invalid as a result of the malfeasance or misconduct of another author’s work on which one’s article is based. A retraction containing explanatory information is published and bidirectionally linked, and the original article online is clearly and permanently marked as having been retracted (e.g., by a watermark on each page).

Removal: Deletion of content from the scholarly record (extremely rare). Bibliographic information will remain a part of the scholarly record, but the actual article content will be removed in the event of a court order to do so; if there is a clear risk of legal liability to the author, publisher, or copyright holder or if the content poses a danger to the public.

Copyright and Permissions

During submission of a manuscript, the author will be required to affirm that

  • No material in the manuscript is the copyrighted work of another individual or organization. OR
  • Any material that is the copyrighted work, or an adaptation of such work, of another individual or organization is clearly marked as such and that the author has obtained permission for its use in the manuscript in all forms (i.e., both print and electronic) and languages.

Seek written permission for publication by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) in all forms (i.e., both print and electronic) and all languages, every time you use or adapt any text or images that are not your (or a co-author’s) original work.

Evidence of permission for direct re-use or adaptation—or formal notification that permission is not needed—must be uploaded along with your manuscript files upon submission. If a permissions issue is discovered after you submit your manuscript via ScholarOne Manuscripts, peer review will be delayed. If your manuscript is accepted, there will be production delays upon discovering a permissions issue.

If copyright infringement is discovered after publication, your article will be retracted immediately and you (and ASHA, as the publisher) may be subject to legal action by the infringed party.

Authors must affirm, at submission, that they recognize they will liable for any claims or penalties resulting from the unauthorized publication of copyrighted material.

Authors are responsible for paying any fees requested from copyright holders to grant the reprint or adaptation.

When to Seek Permission

Always seek permission from the copyright holder, who is usually the publisher and not the author, if

  • you copied and pasted (or otherwise reproduced) text or images from anywhere online into your manuscript.
  • you copied and pasted (or otherwise reproduced) text or images from a computer software program/app into your manuscript.
  • you started with text or images from someone else’s work (published or not) and modified it into something new for your manuscript.
  • you intend to use text or images from someone else’s work (published or not) in a test or tool you created yourself and plan to publish test items from and/or earn money from sale of the test/tool.
  • your image includes someone’s face. (If the person in the picture is a minor, the parent or guardian’s consent must be uploaded.)

These guidelines are especially true for material that is part of an assessment/diagnostic instrument. Never include actual test items in your manuscript unless you have received explicit permission form the publisher to do so.

Fair Use and Public Domain

Please note that online searches for public domain content are not necessarily reliable. You must due your due diligence to ascertain that the material you intend to use is actually in the public domain. In the absence of clear notation to that effect on the material (either via a caption or license), consider such material not to be in the public domain.

If you have read through a license that you believe grants your use of the content without a formal request, upload a copy of that license during submission of your manuscript files. If you paid an artist to create images, upload a copy of the signed agreement for use from the artist.

Many publishers post their “fair use” policies. These indicate the extent of their content in any given article that can be used without permission. If no fair use policy can be found, assume that permission must be obtained.

Acceptance Criteria

The principal criteria for acceptance are significance of the topic or experimental question, conformity to rigorous standards of evidence and scholarship, and clarity of writing. ASHA membership is not a factor in selection. No manuscript that has been published (including in an electronic form) or is under consideration elsewhere may be submitted.

Reporting Standards

Clinical studies appearing in ASHA journals must meet recognized standards for designing and implementing their studies and reporting the findings: 

  • Articles reporting randomized clinical trials must follow the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT).
  • Nonrandomized clinical evaluations must follow the Transparent Reporting of Evaluations with Nonrandomized Designs (TREND) statement.
  • Studies of diagnostic accuracy must meet the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD). 


ASHA expects of its members high standards of ethical conduct in all professional activities. In addition to the ASHA Code of Ethics, ASHA has issued practice policy documents to clarify ethical issues related to research and scholarly activities. Authors, particularly those who are ASHA members, are encouraged to review these documents and apply them to their research and scholarly endeavors. In addition, the following policies and their associated resources apply to the publication of research in ASHA journals.

Ethics in Research and Scholarly Activity

Guidelines for the Responsible Conduct of Research: Ethics and the Publication Process
Protection of Humans in Research
All research to be submitted for publication in ASHA journals in which human participants are used must adhere to the basic ethical considerations for the protection of human participants in research. Where applicable by law or institutional affiliation, authors must provide assurance of approval by an appropriate institutional review board or equivalent review process. The basis for these considerations can be found in The Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects (1979).

Protection of Animals in Research

All research to be submitted for publication in ASHA journals in which animal subjects are used must ensure that animals have been treated humanely with appropriate consideration of their comfort and health. Where applicable by law or institutional affiliation, authors must provide assurance of approval by an appropriate institutional animal care and use committee. The basis for these considerations can be found in the statement of the American Physiological Society regarding use and care of animals in research.

Ethics and Scientific Misconduct

If an editor suspects scientific misconduct, the editor will bring the concern to the Publications Board. If it is determined that the author is not an ASHA member or certificate holder, the editor will bring the concern to a research ethics screening subcommittee. This subcommittee will have as members the editor (who will serve as chair) and two members of the Publications Board, including one with expertise in the content area of the manuscript in question. In addition, the ASHA Director of Publications will serve as an ex-officio member. The charge to the screening subcommittee will be to determine whether the concerns have substantive merit and whether the potential for scientific misconduct is apparent.

If the concern appears to have substance, the first author’s home institution will be contacted by the ASHA Publications Board, and the institution’s appropriate research integrity officer will be notified of the concerns. The adjudication of the case, then, will be left to the home institution.

In referring the concern to the home institution, the ASHA Publications Board will request that it be notified of the outcome of any investigation or adjudication. The Publications Board will then determine procedures for dealing with the manuscript in question (issues such as withdrawal, removal from the web site, corrections in the form of errata, etc.).

When the Author Is an ASHA Member

If an editor suspects scientific misconduct, the editor will bring the concern to the Publications Board. The Publications Board will file a formal complaint with the ASHA Board of Ethics.

If and when the case is resolved, the ASHA Board of Ethics will inform the Publications Board of the outcome. The Publications Board will determine procedures for dealing with the manuscript in question (issues such as withdrawal, removal from the Web site, corrections in the form of errata, etc.).

Conflicts of Interest

As part of the manuscript submission process, authors are required to disclose any real or potential conflicts of interest that could be seen as having an influence on the research (e.g., financial interests in a test or procedure, or funding by an equipment or materials manufacturer for efficacy research). Sources of outside support for research, including funding, equipment, and supplies, must be named during the submission process (and questions to that effect will be presented online to authors as part of the article submission process). In addition, authors must disclose any financial or other nonprofessional benefit(s) that might result from the publication of the manuscript and that reviewers or readers might consider to have affected the conduct or reporting of the work. If the author is uncertain about what might be considered a conflict of interest, he or she should err on the side of full disclosure by reporting the potential conflict when requested to do so during submission. Information about conflicts of interest may be made available to reviewers at the editor's discretion. The role(s) of the support organization, if any, in the collection of data, in its analysis and interpretation, and in the right to approve or disapprove publication of the finished manuscript also must be detailed during the submission process. If a support agency claims the right to approve/disapprove publication, the author should have completed this process by the time of manuscript submission. If, in the editor's judgment, the author has a real or potential conflict of interest, that conflict must be acknowledged with a disclosure statement on the first page of the article. Authors will be informed of this decision before acceptance.

Confidentiality/Privileged Information

Manuscripts submitted to ASHA journals are privileged information. They are confidential and must not be discussed with anyone other than the journal editor and the assigned associate editor. After the final publication decision has been made, reviewers should destroy their copies of the manuscript.

Statistical Consultation

Occasionally, a reviewer must consult with colleagues on some aspect of a paper, such as the statistical analysis. Such consultations should occur only with the editor’s or associate editor’s permission and without providing the author’s identity or details of the manuscript’s content.

Mentoring Individual Doctoral Students

For the purpose of training PhD students in the peer review process, a manuscript reviewer/mentor may engage a PhD student in the review process under the mentor's guidance. (One student per mentor per paper.) The mentor bears full responsibility for the review. The PhD student will be bound by the same principles of confidentiality that govern the review process as a whole. It is the responsibility of the mentor to inform the journal editorial administrator, the Editor, and AE of the mentee’s identity. The editorial administrator will enter the information into the manuscript administrative record. If a doctoral student conducts a written review, the mentor must append the review to his or her formal review and mark the appended review as having been done by a doctoral student.

Just Accepted and Newly Published

Manuscripts that were accepted for publication but not yet edited, formatted, and revised were released in the Just Accepted collection in the journal. They were indexed in MEDLINE and were available through searches in PubMed, Google, and other venues. Prepublication information, including the date, appeared on the PDF file of each manuscript in Just Accepted.

The format for citing these manuscripts is as follows:

Brockmann, M., Storck, C., Carding, P. N., & Drinnan, M. J. (in press). Voice loudness and gender effects on jitter and shimmer in healthy adults. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. Retrieved from [URL].

Readers who want to respond to the content of a paper may do so using the traditional letter-to-the-editor process after final publication of the paper.

Upon being edited, formatted, and revised, manuscripts are then removed from Just Accepted and released as Newly Published articles. These are released in advance of placement in an issue, so they do not carry issue pagination. They are citable using an Advance Online Publication citation format. Upon release in an issue, these articles are removed from the Newly Published collection.

With the move to a continuous publication model and the steadily decreasing time from acceptance to publication, ASHA Journals has the opportunity to replace the Just Accepted portion of ASHAWire with a space to enhance engagement with ASHA members, researchers, and other CSD professionals through social media. To prepare for this workflow transition, manuscripts accepted late 2015 will skip Just Accepted posting and first appear on ASHAWire in the Newly Published queue (if not too close to the scheduled archival issue publication). Prior to Newly Published posting, even if page proofs have not yet been received, authors of accepted manuscripts can cite/reference their work as in press. ASHA Journals will release additional information about our platform upgrade, when it becomes available.

Open Access

ASHA has committed to working with funding bodies throughout the world to ensure that all authors may publish with us and remain compliant with their funder’s open access policies.

NIH Public Access Policy

On April 7, 2008, the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) Public Access Policy mandated that authors who have received NIH funding must make that research publicly accessible in PubMed Central (PMC), NIH’s free digital archive of biomedical and life sciences journal literature.

ASHA now deposits to PubMed Central, on behalf of authors, any articles that have received NIH funding. These articles are made publicly available via PMC—in their final, published form—6 months after publication. All NIH-funded articles published in ASHA’s journals from the first issues of 2015 forward have been deposited to PMC.

For these deposited articles, copyright is held by ASHA unless the authors would like to also choose to publish the article as open access. Choosing to publish via open access is not a requirement of the NIH Public Access policy.

RCUK Open Access Policy

ASHA journals are 100% compliant with the open access policy of the Research Councils U.K. (RCUK).

RCUK requires that any research funded by any of their seven research councils and submitted for publication from April 1, 2013, forward must be made freely accessible online, with an embargo period of no longer than 6 months. In addition, the published research must include a license that permits copying, distribution, and reuse.

Authors can choose to comply with the RCUK policy by either a gold or green open access option.

Gold Open Access

Authors choosing gold open access will:

  • Identify during manuscript submission that the RCUK was a funding source for the research being reported.
  • Request that a Creative Commons CC BY license be used on the article if accepted for publication. A copyright transfer agreement will, thus, not be a requirement for publication.
  • Pay an article processing charge (APC) of $2,500 upon acceptance for publication.

ASHA will then publish the article with the CC BY license and provide immediate and permanent open access to the final published article on the journal website.

Green Open Access

Authors opting for green open access will be choosing a self-archiving means of compliance with the RCUK open access policy, which involves the following:

  • Authors must retain a copy of their accepted manuscript (i.e., the version reflecting all peer-review related revisions).
  • Authors then must post the accepted manuscript in their required institutional repository in accordance with ASHA’s embargo period. ASHA requires a 6-month embargo following the date of final publication.
  • When posting the accepted manuscript to the institutional repository, authors must add a Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND license to the manuscript. A link back to the final published version of the ASHA journal website must also be provided on the manuscript.

There are no fees for the authors or the institution for this green open access option.

Wellcome Trust

Authors funded by the Wellcome Trust can be assured that publishing in the ASHA journals will allow them to be fully compliant with their funder’s open access policy. However, there are important requirements to note for both the authors and ASHA.

Key Requirements:

  • During manuscript submission, authors must identify Wellcome Trust as a funding source.
  • If the article is accepted for publication, ASHA will add a Creative Commons CC BY license to the article and will not require a copyright transfer agreement to be signed.
  • Before publication, authors must ensure that Wellcome Trust pays the article processing charge of $2,500 to ASHA (as noted in the Wellcome Trust Author Guide).
  • Upon publication, the article will be made immediately and permanently available via open access on the ASHA journal website.
  • Upon publication, ASHA will deposit the final published article to PubMed Central (PMC) and to its mirror sites such as Europe PMC, on behalf of authors. The article will carry a 6-month embargo from date of final publication by ASHA.

There is not a green open access option for authors funded by Wellcome Trust via the ASHA journals.

Open Access Option

Regardless of any funding-source considerations, authors may choose to publish with open access in any of the ASHA journals. In doing so, simply select the Creative Commons Attribution license that best suits the work and supply that information during submission of the manuscript.

Please note: Because of the extensive costs borne by ASHA in submission and peer review, production, and online hosting and preservation, ASHA assesses an article processing charge (APC) of $2,500 for the open access option. This fee must be paid upon acceptance for publication.

To avoid potential delays in publication, ASHA strongly encourages authors to determine whether to publish via open access before submitting a manuscript. Doing so affects other processes, such as whether to require a copyright transfer agreement and how to construct the footer of the published article.

Please note: Choosing the open access option has no bearing on the nature of the peer review of the submission.

Previously Published Works/Republication of Works With Limited Circulation

Except in the case of Special Reports (see below), ASHA journals do not consider for review submissions that have been published in the same, or essentially the same, form elsewhere. Authors who are modifying or extending work that has previously been published must notify the editor of the possible previous publication of their submission and provide a rationale for considering the new work to be substantially different from the original. They must also clearly acknowledge these prior publications in their manuscript.

This policy is meant to apply to all types of previously published materials, including conference proceedings and book chapters that have been offered for public sale. It does not necessarily apply to manuscripts that previously have been abstracted for proceedings of a conference or by a dissertation/thesis abstracting service. It also may not apply to duplications or revisions of work previously published in a form such as a university or government report that has limited circulation or availability, whether in print or online (e.g., working papers disseminated primarily among colleagues at the same institution).

In some unclear cases, a decision must be made to determine whether a manuscript represents original or duplicate work. This decision always rests with the editor of the ASHA journal, who may consult with the chair of ASHA's Publications Board as part of the decision process.


Once a paper has been accepted and forwarded to the Publication Office, the staff will edit further for style (in accordance with APA Publication Manual standards), clarity, and consistency, and will format for publication. Authors are sent page proofs for final proofreading. Only minimal alterations are permissible on page proofs. For additional guidance on editorial and production matters, particularly with regard to manuscript style/formatting and publication requirements, please consult the Manuscript Preparation and Submission section of this site.


Non-English Articles

Although the Publications Board recognizes certain advantages in publishing select articles in languages other than English, such projects are time and cost prohibitive due to the amount of human and financial resources required to do them well. Consequently, the Publications Board policy is to publish articles in its four scholarly journals in English only.

Permission to Translate Articles for Use in Other Publications

Occasionally, individuals request permission to translate and distribute articles (or portions of articles) from grant such permissions on a case-by-case basis. Certain conditions must apply to all approved cases, however. This includes permission of the authors and of the ASHA Publications Office. In addition, the individual or institution requesting permission must satisfy the ASHA Publications Office that the translator is well qualified to perform the translation. Finally, the following statement must appear in boldface on the front page of the document: Neither the authors nor ASHA were involved in the translation of this article from English. Neither the authors nor ASHA assume any responsibility for the accuracy of this translation.

Translations of Articles Previously Published in Non-English Journals

ASHA journals typically do not consider manuscripts that have been published elsewhere. However, if an editor considers an article important enough, and also considers the original publication obscure enough that broad dissemination was not possible, an article can be republished in an ASHA journal. This has occurred very rarely, however. Such an article must clearly reference the original and include all necessary disclosures to indicate that the article is a republished translation; publication is, of course, also contingent on permission from the original authors and the copyright holder, for all uses (both print and online).

Bias-Free and Person-First Language

We at ASHA Journals follow the style guidelines set forth in the APA Publication Manual (6th ed.). As such, authors should be mindful of the importance of using language that is free of bias or the suggestion thereof. Per APA style, "Constructions that might imply bias against persons on the basis of gender, sexual orientation, racial or ethnic group, disability, or age are unacceptable" (p. 71). The use of person-first (vs. disability-first) language is not only preferable; it is necessary.

Authors who publish in ASHA journals should assume that their articles will be copyedited with these guidelines in mind. We realize that some attempts to follow these guidelines may result in wordiness or clumsy prose. Therefore, we ask authors to review these types of changes when first proofs are received. APA says, "As always, good judgment is required. If your writing reflects respect for your participants and your readers and if you write with appropriate specificity and precision, you will be contributing to the goal of accurate, unbiased communication" (p. 71).

There are many situations in which authors should be mindful of the language they use so as to avoid bias or the appearance of bias.

  • Example 1: The use of "normal" to describe human beings is avoided because it suggests, incorrectly, that the other groups are somehow "abnormal." Thus, ASHA rewords a phrase such as "normal participants" to “typical participants” to avoid describing a person as “normal.” In a similar way, we rephrase “normal-hearing participants” to "participants with normal hearing" to adhere to person-first language.
  • Example 2: In listing the gender breakdown of a group of participants, authors should list not only the number of male participants but also the number of female participants, even if the number of female participants can be safely assumed. For example, “30 participants (10 men)” would be expanded to “30 participants (10 men, 20 women).”
  • Example 3: ASHA has been informed by members of the Deaf community that using "deaf" as an adjective to describe human participants (e.g., “deaf participants”) is acceptable and not seen as biased by the Deaf community. Therefore, no changes would be made in this example.

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

View Article Abstract & Purchase Options

To access this pdf, log in to an existing user account, become an associate, or purchase a short-term subscription.

This Issue Buy Now