Submit to the journal

How to submit

Research for All welcomes contributions from anyone who works in engaged research, and particularly encourage people to co-create contributions with their collaborators. To be considered for publication in Research for All, please firstly send an outline or abstract of 300-400 words, along with a completed contributor questionnaire (, to the Editors at

The journal publishes a range of article types, aimed at reaching our diverse academic and practitioner audience. Please refer and read carefully the author guidelines before submitting (

Research for All considers submissions on condition that they have not been published already and are not under consideration for publication or in press elsewhere. Contributions to the journal must report original research and will be subjected to review by referees at the discretion of the Editor(s).

Authors are welcome to contact the journal with pre-submission queries by emailing the journal at

Submit your manuscript

Please read the following notes in full before submitting your manuscript by email to addressed to the Editor.

Submission statement of intent

Upon submitting, the article is considered under review for possible publication on the condition that it is submitted solely to Research for All and that the article or a substantial portion of it is not under consideration and has not been published elsewhere. By submitting, authors are agreeing that the submission is original except for material in the public domain and such excerpts of other works have written permission of the copyright owner. Where there is potential for duplication, authors must correctly reference and cite the work. By way of submitting, all authors have read and agree to the journal’s Editorial Policy ( and the Journals Contributor Agreement, found publicly available online at

Authorship and author consent

All listed authors must have made a significant contribution to the article in the manuscript and have approved all its claims. Authors are required to include an authorship statement in their manuscript to outline how each author contributed to the paper, after any acknowledgements in the article. For journals operating a double blind peer-review process, this information should be removed from the main manuscript file for peer review.

UCL Press adheres to the statement of authorship as outlined by the ICMJE statement (, and considers an author of an article to have:

  • made substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
  • drafted the work or revised it critically for important intellectual content; AND
  • made final approval of the version to be published; AND
  • agrees to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

For suspected and incorrect authorship, UCL Press journals will refer to the UCL Press Journals Editorial Policy as outlined at and follow COPE guidelines.


Double anonymised peer review

Research for All operates double anonymised peer review, where both the reviewers and authors are anonymised during review. Authors are required to submit an anonymised version of the manuscript, stripped of all identifying references to the author(s) for peer review, in addition to the main manuscript word file as described below.

  1. The complete manuscript not anonymised, as a word file (.doc/.docx, etc.) and;
  2. An anonymised PDF version of the manuscript, stripped of all identifying references to the author(s) for peer review (anonymisation includes references to authors, acknowledgements, self references, and any electronic author identification., etc.)

Manuscripts may be returned before peer review if manuscripts are not sufficiently blinded.

Submission Preparation Checklist

Please download and complete the RFA submission checklist ( and submit it with your manuscript - this will help you keep track of everything you need to do.

Criteria for acceptance 

Is the piece in scope?

The journal has a particular focus on the processes of engaged research, and the difference that engagement makes. Typical themes include:

  • Reflections on the engagement processes undertaken, and what the authors have learnt about public engagement with research as a consequence.
  • Empirical research studies on engagement, or support for engagement with research.
  • How engagement with research influences research findings, outputs or how research is understood or used.
  • How engagement with research is leading to new professional roles and identities.
  • Case studies of public engagement with research, including all aspects of engagement (i.e. inspiring school children with science; collaborative research; community engagement; consulting publics; sharing research outcomes etc.)

Articles that are not in scope of this journal include:

  • Content describing the outcomes without reflecting on or evaluating the processes of engaged research. For example, if you have used patient involvement in research about arthritis, we would be interested in how the patient involvement affects the research, the patients and the impacts, but not on papers that talk about the findings relating to arthritis alone.
  • Effective engagement that does not relate to research (broadly defined), e.g. you have supported students to volunteer in community settings. While we recognise the value of these approaches, the journal focuses on research

Is the piece accessible to a variety of readers of the journal?

Our readers include researchers, practitioners, professionals, patients, community leaders, public, policymakers, collaborators, artists, and members of cultural organisations, community groups and charities. Their expertise and interests span a variety of disciplines, practices and experiences. They are keen to learn from others and keen to share their expertise.

Where specific language has been used has it been explained clearly?

We invite you to use accessible language. When using technical terms please explain what they mean and how you are using them in your article.

Does the piece represent new learning? Are the authors able to reflect on the key learning from the article, and summarise it effectively?

We recognise that it is not always clear whether learning is just new to you, or new to others as well. We are keen to ensure we support contributions that bring new learning to light wherever it has been inspired. A key point to consider before starting to write is whether you have some key learning points you want to share. Share this with us in your original expression of interest and, where needed, we can provide support to explore what your angle is. It may be that what is new is the people who have contributed to the learning, rather than the learning itself e.g. a collaborative piece that draws in the voices of all involved.

Is my paper the right length?

Authors should be succinct as possible and refer to the article type descriptions in this journal guidance. Please note that the journal will not accept papers longer than 10,000 words and authors may be requested to revise their article before peer review to reduce the word count if it exceeds the article type limit.