About the Journal
Mission and Scope
The Journal of Therapeutic and Applied Geek and Gaming Culture (TAGGC) was founded in 2025 as a place for professionals studying the intersections of Geek and gaming cultures and mental health to share their work. The journal is affiliated with the 501(c)(3) nonprofit Geek Therapy. The term “Geek Therapy” was coined by Josué Cardona in 2011 and refers to a specific model of integrating Geek culture into practice. The journal seeks to expand research affiliated with this and other similar models, as well as related interventions, in ways that are accessible to both academic and non-academic audiences. The journal prioritizes academic integrity as a fully blind, peer-reviewed scholarly journal. It also remains invested in diverse perspectives from a wide range of professions for whom the study of Geek and gaming cultures and mental health is relevant. For this reason, submissions are open to anyone and are accepted on a rolling basis for twice-yearly publication.
Process of Peer Review
The Journal of TAGGC is a double-blind, peer-reviewed journal. Reviewers are expected to have research or applied experience in the areas of Geek and/or Gaming cultures and mental health. They are expected to self-identify as members of Geek and/or Gaming cultures. While the journal acknowledges the inherent biases in studying a culture one belongs to, it also recognizes a long history of biases against Geek and Gaming cultures by researchers outside these communities, which has caused harm. By maintaining a pool of reviewers who self-identify as members of Geek and/or Gaming cultures and possess relevant academic and professional experience, the journal seeks to reduce harm to the communities studied while also remaining critical and curious.
As a culturally conscious journal in an emerging field, the Journal of TAGGC, additionally seeks to shape the process of peer review such that it is collaborative and constructive as opposed to reinforcing academic or cultural gatekeeping. Reviewers are asked to abide by review guidelines that promote constructive feedback. Editors, meanwhile, are tasked with ensuring that reviewers who do not abide by the guidelines receive feedback on their reviews, just as those submitting to the journal for publication receive feedback on their submissions.
Accepted articles will be processed for open-access publication online. Authors whose articles are not accepted will be given feedback on ways to improve their work in alignment with the journal’s mission and framing, either for future re-submission to the Journal of TAGGC, or potential submission for publication elsewhere.
Accessibility
Journal of TAGGC is an online-only Diamond Open Access publication of the nonprofit Geek Therapy. Journal of TAGGC abides by the Geek Therapy Terms of Service, which explain why and how we collect, use, and process information that you provide to us. Journal of TAGGC uses the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license.
While the journal itself is open-access, meaning articles are accessible to everyone without payment, the Journal of TAGGC does not act as an open access repository for data used in the studies it publishes. Anyone wishing to replicate studies or access data used by authors would need to reach out to the corresponding authors of individual articles to request access to data, which is not guaranteed.
Types of Scholarly Work Accepted
At this time, the Journal of TAGGC is accepting original research articles, brief reports, systematic reviews, case studies, best practices, and perspectives.
Original Research
Original research articles are those which consist of in-depth literature review, methods of data collection, data analysis, and discussion of novel research in the field of mental health and geek and gaming cultures. Original research articles should include a brief statement regarding the process of approval by an institutional review board (IRB) or other official, approving body tasked with the role of protecting human subjects. An exception to this is if research was collected on data that exists in the public domain (e.g., qualitative analysis of publicly published fanfiction). While IRB approval is not required for publicly accessible data, a statement should still be included about privacy and safety considerations, where appropriate. Some data, such as archival and quality improvement projects, may be deemed exempt by an IRB or other approving body. While it is acceptable to use exempt data in submissions, confirmation of exemption should still be included in the text of the submission. Original research should be no less than 4,000 words and no more than 10,000 words.
Brief Reports
Brief reports present original research findings that are preliminary or limited in scope (e.g., data derived from a small sample size). Brief report articles should include a brief statement regarding the process of approval by an institutional review board (IRB) or other official, approving body tasked with the role of protecting human subjects. An exception to this is if research was collected on data that exists in the public domain (e.g., qualitative analysis of publicly published fanfiction). While IRB approval is not required for publicly accessible data, a statement should still be included about privacy and safety considerations, where appropriate. Some data, such as archival and quality improvement projects, may be deemed exempt by an IRB or other approving body. While it is acceptable to use exempt data in submissions, confirmation of exemption should still be included in the text of the submission. Brief reports should not exceed 3500 words.
Systematic Reviews
Systematic reviews are reviews of the literature concerning a specific topic or questions that follow a structured methodology to identify and evaluate the state of existing research. Systematic reviews need not be approved by an IRB or other approving authority so long as the methods used to identify research include only that which is already accessible by the public. Systematic reviews should be no less than 3500 words and no more than 10,000 words.
Case Studies
Case studies are articles that highlight the utility of addressing geek and gaming culture in mental health practice with 1-3 clients. Case studies should address a novel approach to practice, the adaptation of a specific theoretical framework or evidence-based practice, or an atypical clinical presentation illustrative of a gap in the field of research and practice. Case studies do not need IRB or other official approval so long as they are deidentified. It is the ethical and legal responsibility of the author(s) to ensure that any cases included in submissions are thoroughly deidentified. A guide to deidentification can be found here. A statement of deidentification should also be included in the submission. Composite cases may be used to address work with specific cultural groups for whom deidentification of a single case would be difficult without compromising client privacy and cultural significance of the study. For case studies in which the demographic details of a single case are important to the study’s contribution to the field and can not be deidentified, IRB or other approval will need to be obtained, similar to original research and brief reports. Case studies should not exceed 3500 words.
Best Practices
Best practice articles are those that discuss the ethics, design, or systems management in relation to a specific clinical or research practice. If these articles use data that involves human subjects or other protected information, such as that internal to a hospital, clinic, university, etc., then IRB or other appropriate approval will need to be stated in the submission. If the article does not use such data, no such statement of approval is required. Best practice articles should not exceed 10000 words
NEED A PRIVACY STATEMENT and COPYRIGHT STATEMENT
Use of AI Technologies
We do not discourage the use of artificial intelligence to edit and format reference lists. It is, however, the user’s ethical responsibility to ensure that any information submitted is accurate. If reviewers or editors find that any references are fictitious during the review process, your submission will be withdrawn from consideration. If it is discovered that any references are fictitious after an article has been published, the journal will rescind publication.
———————————————————————————————————————
Editorial Team
Editor: Kaela Joseph, PhD
Managing Editor: Josué Cardona, MS
Associate Editors: [Accepting Applications]
Editorial Board: [Accepting Applications]