Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Current Issues in Sport Science (CISS) is an international open-access journal publishing articles of high standard on all aspects of sport and exercise science. The journal is structured into the following six sections:  

  • biology & medicine
  • biomechanics & informatics
  • movement & exercise science
  • pedagogy & history
  • psychology & philosophy
  • sociology & economics

The Journal publishes on behalf of the Sport Scientific Societies of Austria and Switzerland: the Österreichische Sportwissenschaftliche Gesellschaft, ÖSG (www.oe-s-s.at), and the Sportwissenschaftliche Gesellschaft der Schweiz/Sociètè suisse des sciences du sport, SGS/4S (www.sportwissenschaft.ch)


Section Policies

Target Article

Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Biology & Medicine

  • Arno Schmidt-Trucksäss
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Biomechanics & Informatics

  • Markus Tilp
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Movement & Exercise Science

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Pedagogy & History

  • André Gogoll
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Psychology & Philosophy

  • Günter Amesberger
  • Thomas Finkenzeller
  • Sabine Würth
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Sociology & Economics

  • Otmar Weiß
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

Peer Review Statement

All articles in this journal undergo rigorous peer review, based on initial editor screening and anonymised (double-blind) refereeing by at least two reviewers.


Reviewers are anonymous by default. During the review process, reviewers’ identities are not revealed to authors or to other reviewers unless reviewers themselves reveal their identities by signing their names at the end of their comments. However, reviewers are given credit by naming them on the title page of the published article unless they explicitly ask for staying anonymous.

The Section Editor is not anonymous to authors and reviewers. The Section Editor’s and Editor-in-Chiefs names are indicated on the title page of the published article.

Decision process

The Editor-in-Chief and the Section Editor together make a decision based on the reviewers' comments.

Conflicting reviews

If reviewers appear to disagree fundamentally, the editors may try to invite an additional reviewer; another approach could be to share all the reviews with each of the reviewers to get additional comments that may help the editors to make a decision. It needs to be recognised that decisions are not necessarily made according to majority rule. Instead, the editors evaluate the recommendations and comments of the reviewers alongside comments by the authors and material that may not have been made available to those reviewers.

Notifying reviewers of decisions

Reviewers’ comments along with the decision letter are sent to all reviewers of the respective manuscript. If reviewers have revealed their identities, this information will be forwarded to other reviewers.

Reviewers who may have offered an opinion different from the final decision should not feel that their recommendation was not adequately considered or underappreciated. Experts often disagree, and it is the job of the editorial team to make a decision.Difference of opinion lies in the nature of things and should be seen as stimulation for scientific achievement.

Revisions and appeals

When a paper has been revised in response to the review- or when authors appeal against a decision, we may ask reviewers to provide additional comments in order to allow authors a fair hearing.


Open Access Policy

As an international open access journal, CISS is following the guidelines of the Budapest Open Access Initiative.



CISS accepts only papers that conform to the highest standards of ethics and participant protection. Hence, a experimental work in which humans are participants must conform to requirements stipulated in the Declaration of Helsinki (http://www.wma.net/en/20activities/10ethics/10helsinki/) as well as to the laws of the country in which the work was undertaken. The manuscript should contain a statement about approval by an ethics committee or review board. A statement about ethics approval should be made at the beginning of the Methods section.