Contributor FAQ
- 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 use estimation rather than null hypothesis significance testing?
- 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 materials?
- I have a question that’s not listed here. How can I get an answer?
1. 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. As described in the Submission Guidelines, “Psychological Science encourages submission of papers from all fields—including cognitive science, neuroscience, linguistics, and social sciences—that are relevant to psychological research, theory, or applications.” If your manuscript fits this description, then we encourage you to submit it.
2. 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”).
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. What counts in the word limit and what is ignored?
See Table 1.
Table 1. Limits for Psychological Science Articles by Type
|
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, Author Contributions, References |
||||
|
Research Article |
2,000 |
40* |
n/a |
X |
X |
||
|
Preregistered Direct Replication |
1,500 |
30* |
3 |
X |
X |
||
|
Commentary or Reply to Commentary |
1,000 |
20* |
1 |
X |
X |
||
|
Letter to the Editors |
500 |
10 |
0 |
Letters feature main text only; notes, acknowledgements, tables, figures, and appendices are not permitted. There is no cover page, abstract, statement of relevance, or statement of author contributions. |
|||
*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.
6. Researchers are now meant to use estimation rather than null hypothesis significance testing (NHST). I report effect sizes, but have always used NHST to guide interpretation. That has been the universal practice in my research field, and what I see in the journals. Why should I change?
Psychological Science expects its authors to adopt best research practice, including best statistical practice, which now in most cases is not NHST. Despite the persistence of NHST, its serious flaws have been documented over half a century. Recent heightened concern about selective reporting and lack of replicability adds to the reasons for change. Developing our skills at using estimation, and other preferred techniques, contributes to progress towards psychological science becoming a quantitative cumulative discipline. For further justification for shifting to the new statistics, as well as guidance for making the shift, see this tutorial and this video series.
My main research interest is to establish whether or not my manipulation has an effect. The size of the effect is of little or no importance, so, surely, NHST is an appropriate analysis strategy in this case?
Statistical significance is as much an indication of sample size as of the size of an effect. It is not a reliable indicator that an effect is non-zero. The p value is not a measure of the probability the results are due to chance. We are most likely to be convinced an effect is non-zero after the initial study has been replicated, and a meta-analysis of all relevant studies gives an overall estimated effect size, with confidence interval, that we can interpret as indicating a non-zero effect. Meta-analysis requires effect size and CI information from each study, and NHST is irrelevant. Therefore estimation, which anyway is more informative than NHST, should be used for each study. In addition, using estimation encourages us to move beyond asking merely, “is there an effect?” to asking “how large is the effect?“ Answering “how large?” questions represents progress towards a quantitative discipline. For more, see the tutorial.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. 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).
10. I see that the submission system requires authors to suggest at least two preferred reviewers. Who should be suggested?
Please refrain from recommending any of your mentors or students, recent collaborators, or colleagues from the same department or university as preferred reviewers.
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, because the individuals have reviewed for the journal recently, they are unavailable, their previous reviews have not been sufficiently helpful, or they appear to have a conflict of interest.
11. How quickly are manuscripts reviewed?
As described in the Submission Guidelines, two editors initially review each new submission to decide whether it is likely to be competitive for publication. Within approximately 2 weeks of submission, you will be notified by e-mail that your manuscript either (a) has been declined after initial review or (b) has been sent to two or more external referees for extended review. For manuscripts in the latter category, we strive to provide you with a decision within approximately 60 days of manuscript submission.
12. What is the acceptance rate at Psychological Science?
During 2020, the average rate of acceptance was 6.3%.
13. 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 provide clear and compelling answers to three questions: (1) What will the reader of this paper learn about psychology that she or he did not know (or could not have known) before? (2) Why is that knowledge important for the field? (3) How are the claims made in the article justified by the methods used?
These questions signal our desire to publish innovative findings, grounded in appropriate methods and analyses, that are of general theoretical interest across specialties of psychology and related fields, and that are 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 are written poorly, directed at a small segment of the Psychological Science readership, or report findings that represent an incremental contribution to the literature or reflect questionable research decisions (regarding design, materials, measures, statistical analyses, sample size, etc.).
Before submitting a manuscript, ask yourself the following question (which we encourage reviewers to use in evaluating manuscripts): “If you’re a ‘specialty area A’ psychologist, do the findings reported in the manuscript represent some of the best work in specialty area A, the sort of results 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 paper for Psychological Science.
14. 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.
15. 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 a fundamental misunderstanding that can easily be put right, 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. Most submissions are declined with only a very general statement along the lines of the manuscript being better suited for a more specialized journal, and there is no point appealing those because they are subjective judgments the editor is empowered to make. But if, for example, the action letter says that the sample size was too small whereas you have a solid power analysis indicating that the N was appropriate, then you may wish to appeal the decision.
16. 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.
Authors who wish to pay to make an article/manuscript publicly available immediately upon publication in order to comply with NIH or similar requirements may use the SAGE Choice option (gold open access), in which case SAGE will complete the necessary repository deposits on their behalf.
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.
17. Does Psychological Science accept supplemental materials?
Yes. Authors are free to submit certain types of Supplemental Material (SOM) 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. SOM will not be copyedited or formatted; it will be posted online exactly as submitted.
The editorial team takes the adjective supplemental seriously. SOM should include the sort of material that enhances the reader’s understanding of an article but is not essential for understanding the article. SOM files should be uploaded during initial submission.
If you intend to upload SOM material, please read the Guidelines for Publication of Supplemental Online Material, which describes conventions for naming files and for citing supplemental materials in the manuscript.
18. 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 former Editor-in-Chief Eric Eich’s 2014 editorial, former Editor-in-Chief Steve Lindsay’s 2015 and 2016 editorials, and an in-press chapter by Mellor, Vazire, and Lindsay on writing transparent research reports.
