Contributor FAQ
- What does the peer review workflow look like at Psychological Science?
- What do the different kinds of editors do?
- Can I submit an abstract for consideration in Psychological Science?
- Can you tell me more about the readership?
- Does Psychological Science have special requirements regarding style?
- Are the word limits real or simply suggestions?
- What counts in the word limit and what is ignored?
- Why should I report effect sizes and uncertainties (e.g., confidence intervals) rather than just null hypothesis significance tests?
- How should I prepare graphics for submission?
- It is possible to include color in figures?
- Is there any limit to the number of manuscripts that I can submit to Psychological Science?
- Is it really okay to list preferred reviewers?
- How quickly are manuscripts reviewed?
- What is the acceptance rate at Psychological Science?
- Why are manuscripts declined after initial review?
- May I revise and resubmit a manuscript that has been declined?
- May I appeal the action editor’s decision?
- Can I place a version of my accepted manuscript on my web site and with my university’s research article repository?
- Does Psychological Science accept supplemental files?
- I have a question that’s not listed here. How can I get an answer?
1. What does the peer review workflow look like at Psychological Science?
2. What do the different kinds of editors do?
The Editor-in-Chief, Senior Editors, and Associate Editors are all handling editors. A handling editor is an editor who oversees the peer review process and makes decisions (accept, reject, revise & resubmit) on submissions. In Tier 1 review, first the Editor-in-Chief, then typically a Senior Editor, then sometimes an Associate Editor will evaluate the manuscript for potential desk rejection (rejection without external review). Any of these handling editors can desk reject a submission, and often the decision is made by two handling editors (when both agree that the manuscript is unlikely to be competitive for publication). After Tier 1 review, if the manuscript is not desk rejected it is assigned to one handling editor who coordinates the peer review process for Tier 2 and Tier 3 review and makes a decision. Revisions are almost always sent directly to the editor who handled the original submission (i.e., straight to Tier 2 review). The editor handling a specific submission is sometimes also called the “Action Editor”.
STAR (Statistics, Transparency, & Rigor) editors are not handling editors – they do not make decisions on submitted manuscripts. STAR editors do a few other things:
- Ad hoc advice. STAR editors provide advice to handling editors on a case-by-case basis, typically during Tier 1 and Tier 2 review. This advice could be about statistics, methods, ethics, integrity, equity/inclusion, and transparency, and typically supplements or fills in gaps not covered by the handling editors’ and external reviewers’ expertise.
- Transparency checks. STAR editors conduct routine transparency checks at two stages of review.
- Light transparency checks (during Tier 2 review). When a handling editor decides to send a manuscript out for external review, a STAR editor is also assigned to do a light transparency check. This includes checking that the Research Transparency Statement is complete, that links to data, analysis scripts, materials, and preregistrations point to relevant-looking documents, and a quick skim of the manuscript to confirm that the level of transparency is accurately represented. The STAR Editor will return a report to the handling editor, flagging any issues or concerns, and any requests from authors for exemptions from transparency requirements. The handling editor will consult with the STAR Editor as needed, and factor this information into their decision.
- In-depth transparency checks (during Tier 3 review). When a handling editor is ready to conditionally accept a manuscript, a STAR editor is tasked with completing an in-depth transparency check. This includes a more thorough check of the data, analysis scripts, materials, and preregistrations, driven by the principles of findability, accessibility, interoperability, and reusability (see FAIR principles). How in-depth these checks are will depend on the capacity of the STAR Editor team. The waiting time at Tier 3 review can be markedly reduced by authors following best practices for making their data, analysis scripts, materials, and preregistrations easy for others to understand and use, and providing thorough documentation and meta-data (e.g., a codebook or read-me file explaining how the dataset is structured, what the variables and their levels are, etc.).
If authors have applied for a Computational Reproducibility Badge, the STAR Editor will spend about one hour attempting to computationally reproduce the main findings in the manuscript. After that, the STAR Editor may work with the author if they feel that computational reproducibility would be achievable with little more effort.
STAR Editors may also conduct random checks of computational reproducibility even for submissions where the authors did not apply for a computational reproducibility badge. Our goal is to work towards being able to conduct computational reproducibility checks for all conditionally accepted manuscripts.
Finally, members of the editorial board are not part of the editing team. The editorial board is made up of volunteers who agree to review regularly for the journal. Editorial board members are like any other reviewer, except that, in principle, they are asked to review more often than non-editorial board members, and we expect them to accept review requests more often. Editorial board members are nevertheless free to decline any specific review request.
2. I have a manuscript that I’m thinking about submitting to Psychological Science. If I send an abstract, will you read it and tell me if it’s a likely candidate for Psychological Science?
Given the volume of submissions that we receive, we simply don’t have the time or the resources to provide feedback prior to submission. The Submission Guidelines provide detailed descriptions of the types of articles that are considered, and the evaluation criteria. If your manuscript fits these criteria, then we encourage you to submit it.
3. The Submission Guidelines say that “Preference is given to articles … that are written to be intelligible to a wide range of readers.” Can you tell me more about the readership?
Psychological Science is distributed to nearly 800 libraries around the world, and nearly 3,000 libraries belong to consortia that have access to Psychological Science. In addition, more than 26,000 APS members receive the journal. Most have advanced degrees, but a substantial number (37%) are students.
Personality/social, clinical, cognitive, developmental, experimental, and general psychology are the most common topic areas reported by members. Because of the international nature of the readership (83% live in North America, 12% in Europe, 3% in Asia, and 1.5% in Australia), authors should avoid writing in a manner that assumes the reader is a citizen of or intimately familiar with the author’s country (e.g., avoid a phrase such as “participants were students at a Midwestern university”).
4. Does Psychological Science have special requirements regarding style?
The journal generally follows the style of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, 7th edition, with the exception that figures and tables should be embedded within the main text near to where they are discussed rather than at the end of the manuscript. Further guidance regarding article structure for Psychological Science can be found here. Please consult the Submission Guidelines for additional details about what to include in your manuscript.
5. Are the stated limits on words, references, and other manuscript components real or simply suggestions?
They are real. Articles published in Psychological Science are intended to communicate innovative methods and findings in straightforward, economical prose; consequently, authors are expected to adhere to the limits for each format. Manuscripts that exceed limits will be returned to authors.
6. What counts in the word limit and what is ignored?
See Table 1.
|
Article Type |
Word Limit |
Reference Limit* |
Figure and/or Table Limit |
What counts toward the word limit? |
|||
|
Introduction & Discussion |
Method & Results |
Notes, Acknowledgments, Appendices |
Cover Page, Abstract, Statement of Relevance, References |
||||
|
Research Article |
2,000 |
40* |
n/a |
X |
X |
||
|
Registered Report or Registered Report with Existing Data |
2,000 (1,000 for Stage 1) |
40* |
n/a |
X (1,000 words each for Introduction and Discussion) |
X |
||
|
Commentary or Reply to Commentary |
1,000 |
20* |
1 |
X |
X |
||
*These are not hard-and-fast limits and editors have the flexibility to allow more references if they are necessary to establish the scientific foundation for the work.
**For commentaries reporting new data, Method and Results sections are not included in the word count.
7. Why should I report effect sizes and uncertainties (e.g., confidence intervals) rather than just null hypothesis significance tests?
Please see the Statistics section of the Submission Guidelines.
8. How should I prepare graphics for submission?
We ask that authors supply the original versions of graphs and diagrams they create. Do not save the image in a different file format, as this makes it harder to resize and make other adjustments to the image during production. For example, if you created a graph in Excel, supply the original Excel file. Photographic images such as brain scans, unless incorporated into a larger graph or display, may still be submitted in standard image formats like JPEG. To avoid appearing blurry or pixilated in print, all figures must have a minimum resolution of 300 pixels per inch (PPI; more information about pixel density can be found here). Please adhere to the following format when naming figure files: AuthorLastNameFigX.fileformat (e.g., RamirezFig1.xls, RamirezFig2.jpg, etc). Please see the APS Figure Format and Style Guidelines for more information.
9. Is it possible to include color in figures?
Yes. Articles that are published can include color in their figures. Please see the Submission Guidelines and APS Figure Format and Style Guidelines for additional information.
10. Is there any limit to the number of manuscripts that I can submit to Psychological Science?
Yes. Since 2004, Psychological Science has had the policy that the editorial staff will not consider papers by the same (set of) author(s) on what the editors consider to be the same topic at the same time. In other words, if McDonald and Nguyen submit a manuscript on modality effects on free recall, Nguyen and McDonald should not submit a manuscript on modality effects on cued recall until review of the first manuscript is complete. In addition, when a manuscript has been accepted for publication, the editors will not consider another submission from that (group of) author(s) on that topic for six months.
Of course, in a true free market of ideas, this policy would be unconscionable. But Psychological Science is seriously constrained in the number of articles that can be published, and this policy is designed to ensure that many different authors appear in the journal’s pages. Editors attempt to follow this policy sensibly, not rigidly (e.g., in deciding whether two manuscripts have the same authors or address the same topic).
11. I see that the submission system requires authors to suggest at least two preferred reviewers. Who should be suggested?
Please do not recommend any of the authors’ mentors or mentees, current or recent collaborators (within 4 years), colleagues from the same university, colleagues who have a close personal relationship, colleagues who have a financial interest in common, or colleagues who could be reasonably perceived to have a conflict of interest.
Authors often are familiar with experts in their area of research, and editors appreciate the suggestions. Of course, editors do not always use the suggested reviewers.
12. How quickly are manuscripts reviewed?
As described in the Submission Guidelines, two editors initially review most new submissions to decide whether they are likely to be competitive for publication. Within approximately 2 weeks of submission, you will be notified by e-mail if your manuscript has been declined after initial review. If your manuscript is sent out for extended review, you will be able to see track its status in your Author Center in our submission system.
13. What is the acceptance rate at Psychological Science?
During 2022, the average rate of acceptance was 8.8%.
14. Why are manuscripts declined after initial review?
In general, manuscripts are declined after initial review because they do not meet the editorial goals of Psychological Science. As discussed in the Submission Guidelines, we look for manuscripts that: (1) are of general interest to psychological scientists (2) address an issue that makes a difference in the way psychologists and scholars in related disciplines think about important issues (3) are as rigorous as is practically and ethically feasible, and frank in addressing limits on their validity.
These criteria signal our desire to publish important research, grounded in appropriate methods and analyses, that is of general interest across specialties of psychology and related fields, and that is written to be intelligible to a wide range of readers. Of course, not all accepted manuscripts meet all of these aims. However, manuscripts are most likely to be declined after initial review when they have a narrow scope, are poorly written, insufficient methodological rigor, insufficient transparency, overclaiming or exaggeration, mismatch between the research aims and the research design, mismatch between the empirical results and the conclusions, signs of flexibility in data collection or analysis, or high risk of statistical inference error (e.g., false positive or false negative, inflated effect size estimate)..
Before submitting a manuscript, ask yourself the following question: “If you’re a ‘specialty area A’ psychologist, does the research reported in the manuscript represent some of the best work in specialty area A, the sort of research that you’d be excited to mention to your colleagues in specialty areas B, C, and D or to colleagues in areas related to psychology?” If the answer is “yes” then we would be pleased and privileged to consider your manuscript for Psychological Science.
15. May I revise and resubmit a manuscript that has been declined?
Not without the editor’s permission. Revisions are by invitation only. If a revision was not invited and you believe that decision was in error, then you may appeal the decision to the action editor.
16. May I appeal the action editor’s decision?
If you believe that the action editor’s decision to reject your manuscript (with or without extended review) was based on an objective error, then you may appeal the decision by replying to the emailed action letter. Please be judicious in deciding whether or not to appeal a decision because considering appeals is burdensome for editors, and authors who make weak appeals create a poor impression. Desk rejection decisions cannot be appealed because they are inherently subjective judgments the editor is empowered to make. But if, for example, the decision letter says that you failed to control for variable X (and this is a major reason for the decision), when in fact you did control for variable X, then you may wish to appeal the decision.
17. I’ve had a manuscript accepted for publication in Psychological Science. Can I place a version on my Web site and with my university’s research article repository?
The version that was submitted may be shared immediately; upon acceptance, you may post the final, accepted version of the article on your or your department’s site or in your departmental or institutional repository. One year after publication, you may make the final, accepted version available in other repositories. You may not post the final published PDF (typeset and formatted by the journal/publisher).
For more information on open access options and compliance at SAGE, including author self-archiving deposits described above (green open access) or SAGE Choice (gold open access), visit SAGE’s Journal Author Gateway.
18. Does Psychological Science accept supplemental materials?
Yes. Authors are free to submit certain types of Supplemental Files for online-only publication. If the manuscript is accepted for publication, such material will be published online on the publisher’s website via Figshare, linked to the article. Supplemental files will not be copyedited or formatted; they will be posted online exactly as submitted.
The editorial team takes the adjective supplemental seriously. Supplemental Files should include the sort of material that enhances the reader’s understanding of an article but is not essential for understanding or evaluating the research presented in the article. Supplemental files should be uploaded during initial submission. If you intend to upload Supplemental files, please read the Guidelines for Publication of Supplemental Files, which describes conventions for naming files and for citing supplemental materials in the manuscript.
19. I have a question that’s not listed here. How can I get an answer?
Send an e-mail to psci@psychologicalscience.org. We’ll answer promptly.
Prospective submitters of manuscripts are encouraged to read incoming Editor-in-Chief Simine Vazire’s editorial, as well as the editorial by Tom Hardwicke, Senior Editor for Statistics, Transparency, & Rigor, and Simine Vazire.
