Political Psychology: Submissions,Acceptances, Downloads,and Citations

Political Psychology has experienced a marked increase in the number of submissions, downloads, citations, and global exposure over the past few years. It is also a more influential journal than it was at the beginning of the decade. Specifically, the journal is now available in more than 4,200 libraries worldwide, compared with 2,200 five years ago; the number of downloads has recently increased to more than 620,000(!), compared with about 100,000 five years ago; the number of new submissions has increased drastically over the past five years to more than 300 per year; and the impact factor has risen to 1.771—the highest in the history of the journal. In 2014 alone, more than 40 articles published in the journal have been downloaded more than 500 times each. In this article, we analyze submissions to Political Psychology, acceptances, downloads, and citations by area of study and methodology.     

American Psychology of Religion and the Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion

It is doubtful whether there ever has been a rise‐fall‐rebirth of the psychology of religion. While the claim has marginal merit for American academic psychology, it has little application in other cultures or even within American psychology of religion outside mainstream psychology. The psychology of religion has always been and remains tied to key individuals who sustain the field. This historical fact is important in understanding the role of the JSSR in the field. Early psychologists of religion such as Hall and James set the pattern for two distinctively different approaches to the psychology of religion. Hall's approach was methodologically restrictive, inherently reductive, and came to dominate the academic psychology of religion. James ‘approach was methodological plural, receptive to the evidential force of religious experience, and quickly marginalized within American psychology. These opposing orientation continue to influence the psychology of religion in societies such as the SSR and its journal. A review of the psychologist editors of JSSR illustrates that the psychology of religion remains a marginal interest of mainstream psychology. It survives because of the interdisciplinary nature of the SSSR and its journal.     

The scientific error of Friedman's poor scholarship: A rejoinder

A recent article by Friedman published in this journal alleges that a study by Whitcher and Fisher (1979) in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology is sexist research. An examination of his critique reveals that the facts are not as he purports. A reading of the Whitcher and Fisher (1979) study shows that the authors followed explicitly APA (1977) guidelines for nonsexist language in writing their article.In his article, Friedman makes a number of critical comments of a general nature that bear no relationship to the focus of our study (e.g., his comments about being touched by doctors; and patients' expectations about the role of doctors, both on p. 749). Unfortunately, he does not clarify which of his comments are aimed at our study and which are not. Therefore, we encourage readers unfamiliar with our research to review our original article.     

An overview and analysis of journal operations, journal publication patterns, and journal impact in school psychology and related fields

This article describes the results of three studies designed to understand better the journal operations, publishing practices, and impact of school psychology journals in recent years. The first study presents the results of a survey focusing on journal operations and peer-review practices that was completed by 61 journal editors of school psychology and aligned journals. The second study presents the results of review and classification of all articles appearing in one volume year for nine school psychology journals (i.e., The California School Psychologist, Canadian Journal of School Psychology, Journal of Applied School Psychology, Journal of School Psychology, Psychology in the Schools, School Psychology Forum, School Psychology International, School Psychology Quarterly, and School Psychology Review). The third study employed multilevel modeling to investigate differences in the longitudinal trends of impact factor data for five school psychology journals listed in the Web of Science (i.e., Journal of School Psychology, Psychology in the Schools, School Psychology International, School Psychology Quarterly, and School Psychology Review). The article addresses implications for authors, editors, and journal editorial teams as well as the status and impact of school psychology journals.     

Social Cognition,Accuracy, and Physiology

Existing norms for scientific communication are rooted in anachronistic practices of bygone eras making them needlessly inefficient. We outline a path that moves away from the existing model of scientific communication to improve the efficiency in meeting the purpose of public science—knowledge accumulation. We call for six changes: (a) full embrace of digital communication; (b) open access to all published research; (c) disentangling publication from evaluation; (d) breaking the “one article, one journal” model with a grading system for evaluation and diversified dissemination outlets; (e) publishing peer review; and (f) allowing open, continuous peer review. We address conceptual and practical barriers to change and provide examples showing how the suggested practices are being used already. The critical barriers to change are not technical or financial; they are social. Although scientists guard the status quo, they also have the power to change it.     

Forty years of the BJGC: a personal review

The origins and development of the British Journal of Guidance and Counselling are outlined. An analysis is provided of the growth of the journal in terms of the numbers of issues, articles and pages; the use of special features to attract and distinguish particular types of article; and the changing balance between guidance and counselling, between youth and adults, and between UK and overseas contributors. Continuing debates relating to the title of the journal are discussed. The functions of such journals are addressed, along with the possible implications of the current moves towards open access publishing.     

The professionalisation of non-denominational religious education in England: politics,organisation and knowledge

In response to contemporary concerns, and using neglected primary sources, this article explores the professionalisation of teachers of Religious Education (RI/RE) in non-denominational, state-maintained schools in England. It does so from the launch of Religion in Education (1934) and the Institute for Christian Education at Home and Abroad (ICE) (1935) to the founding of the Religious Education Council of England and Wales (1973) and the British Journal of Religious Education (1978). Professionalisation is defined as a collective historical process in terms of three inter-related concepts: (1) professional self-organisation and professional politics; (2) professional knowledge; and (3) initial and continuing professional development. The article sketches the history of non-denominational religious education prior to the focus period, to contextualise the emergence of the professionalising processes under scrutiny. Professional self-organisation and professional politics are explored by reconstructing the origins and history of ICE, which became the principal body offering professional development provision for RI/RE teachers for some 50 years. Professional knowledge is discussed in relation to the content of Religion in Education which was oriented around Christian Idealism and interdenominational networking. Changes in journal name in the 1960s and 1970s reflected uncertainties about the orientation of the subject and shifts in understanding over the nature and character of professional knowledge. The article also explores a particular case of resistance, in the late 1960s, to the prevailing consensus surrounding the nature and purpose of RI/RE, and the representativeness and authority of the pre-eminent professional body of the time. In conclusion, the article examines some implications which may be drawn from this history for the prospects and problems of the professionalisation of RE today.     

The Home Observation for Measurement of the Environment: A comment on Zimmerman's critique

This paper is a reply to an article in this journal by M. Zimmerman titled “The Home Observation for Measurement of the Environment: A Comment on Elardo and Bradley's Review”. We found Zimmerman's critique of our original review article (Developmental Review, 1981, 1, 113–145) to contain points which were well taken, and several which seemed pedantic. Specifically, we address his concerns about our discussion of the HOME scale's interrater reliability, test-retest stability, concurrent validity, and predictive validity; and we reply to his comments about the uses of the HOME scale for purposes of screening and matching environments.     

Medical journals' conflicts of interest in the publication of book reviews

The purpose of the study was to assess medical journals’ conflicts of interest in the publication of book reviews. We examined book reviews published in 1999, 2000, and 2001 (N=1,876) in five leading medical journals: Annals of Internal Medicine, British Medical Journal (BMJ), Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), Lancet, and New England Journal of Medicine. The main outcome measure was journal publication of reviews of books that had been published by the journal’s own publisher, that had been edited or authored by a lead editor of the journal, or that posed another conflict of interest. We also surveyed the editors-in-chief of the five journals about their policies on these conflicts of interests. During the study period, four of the five journals published 30 book reviews presenting a conflict of interest: nineteen by the BMJ, five by the Annals, four by JAMA, and two by the Lancet. These reviews represent 5.8%, 2.7%, 0.7%, and 0.7%, respectively, of all book reviews published by the journals. These four journals, respectively, published reviews of 11.9%, 25.0%, 0.9%, and 1.0% of all medical books published by the journals’ publishers. Only one of the 30 book reviews included a disclosure statement addressing the conflict of interest. None of the journals had a written policy pertaining to the conflicts of interest assessed in this study, although four reported having unwritten policies. We recommend that scientific journals and associations representing journal editors develop policies on conflicts of interest pertaining to book reviews. Disclosure: R.M. Davis was North American editor of the BMJ from 1998 to 2001, and is a member of the Board of Trustees of the American Medical Association, which publishes JAMA. The opinions expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy of any organization with which the authors have been affiliated.     

Journal of Addictions and Offader Counseling Submission Patterns,Topic Areas,and Authors: 1979–1998

Articles in the journal of Addictions and Offender Counseling between 1979 and 1998 were analyzed according to authors' demographic characteristics and article content to provide a historical review of the addictions and offender counseling field. Study results, historical trends, and future implications are presented.     

Programmers, Professors, and Parasites: Credit and Co-Authorship in Computer Science

This article presents an in-depth analysis of past and present publishing practices in academic computer science to suggest the establishment of a more consistent publishing standard. Historical precedent for academic publishing in computer science is established through the study of anecdotes as well as statistics collected from databases of published computer science papers. After examining these facts alongside information about analogous publishing situations and standards in other scientific fields, the article concludes with a list of basic principles that should be adopted in any computer science publishing standard. These principles would contribute to the reliability and scientific nature of academic publications in computer science and would allow for more straightforward discourse in future publications.     

A Review of Baum's Review of Conceptual Foundations of Radical Behaviorism

Baum expressed numerous concerns about my Conceptual Foundations of Radical Behaviorism in his review. If his review were an independent submission and I were an independent referee, I would recommend that his review be rejected and that he be encouraged to revise and resubmit, once he has studied the field a bit more and clarified for himself and journal readers several important matters. I outline two sets of concerns that he might usefully clarify in his revision: (a) the important contributions of B. F. Skinner to a book about radical behaviorism, and (b) the nature of private behavioral events. In particular, the methodological behaviorism inherent in Baum's position needs to be resolved.     

Peer review for journals: Evidence on quality control, fairness, and innovation

This paper reviews the published empirical evidence concerning journal peer review consisting of 68 papers, all but three published since 1975. Peer review improves quality, but its use to screen papers has met with limited success. Current procedures to assure quality and fairness seem to discourage scientific advancement, especially important innovations, because findings that conflict with current beliefs are often judged to have defects. Editors can use procedures to encourage the publication of papers with innovative findings such as invited papers, early-acceptance procedures, author nominations of reviewers, structured rating sheets, open peer review, results-blind review, and, in particular, electronic publication. Some journals are currently using these procedures. The basic principle behind the proposals is to change the decision from whether to publish a paper to how to publish it. The author, a professor of marketing at the Wharton School since 1968, was a founder editor of the Journal of Forecasting and the International Journal of Forecasting. This paper is based on a presentation at a workshop, “Advances in Peer Review Research”, American Association for the Advancement of Science Meeting, Baltimore, MD, February 9, 1996.     

Sociocultural factors, resilience, and coping: Support for a culturally sensitive measure of resilience

This investigation presents 1) a literature review concerning how adversity and resilience influence the development of youth from diverse cultural backgrounds; 2) an examination of measures of resilience with regard to cultural factors that relate to the nature of coping and resilience among young adults from diverse racial/ethnic backgrounds; and 3) the exploration of aspects of cultural resilience: childhood stressors, global coping, adaptive coping, maladaptive coping, and sociocultural support. Results for 305 college age women indicated that cultural factors were related to measures of these five aspects of resilience. Childhood stressors were experienced differentially by individuals from different racial/ethnic and social class status backgrounds, supporting proposals that ecological aspects, notably cultural background and experiences, influence the development of resilience. A conceptual framework illustrating how culture contributes to resilience and coping is presented. Implications for the development of a measure of cultural resilience and its usefulness for developmental community interventions are discussed.     

Letters to the editor

One of the books submitted for review to this journal was B.–A. Scharfstein's The philosophers: their lives and the nature of their thought (1980, Oxford). Although not explicitly concerned with logic, it raised various questions for history and historiography (possibilities for psycho-history, for example). Thus I sought a review, which was written by P. Loptson and published in volume 3 (1982), 105–107. The ensuing correspondence has been edited for publication by me, with the authors’ approval.     

Authorship trends in the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis: An update

The Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis (JABA) is considered the flagship journal for the discipline of applied behavior analysis. Thus, popular research topics and other publication trends within JABA reflect the current cultural and scientific contingencies governing the field of behavior analysis. Researchers have previously quantified a number of authorship trends in JABA (and other behavior-analytic journals) across a number of variables, such as gender identity and sex of author, country of origin, or seniority within the field (Dunlap et al., 1998) to examine demographic and organizational factors associated with successful publication in JABA. These analyses ought to be conducted continuously to monitor trends and detect any potential biases (e.g., sexism). Accordingly, the purpose of the present investigation was to replicate previous research in this area (e.g., Dymond et al., 2000) and provide an update of current publication trends within JABA. Implications for future research and publishing practices are discussed.     

Psychology as a quantitative rational science (excerpts)

The purpose of the Psychometric Society is to encourage mathematical psychology. This article justifies the emphasis on quantification, and upon rationalization in science, as well as the Society's conception of the fundamental nature of science.Editor's Note: On September 4, 1936, L. L. Thurstone gave the presidential address at the first annual meeting of the Psychometric Society in Hanover, NH. Uncertainties about the viability of the new journal,Psychometrika, led his colleagues to urge him to publish his address inScience. Excerpts from that paper are reprinted here. Thurstone's examples are now quite dated, and have been omitted, thus thwarting his major intent of providing examples of quantification. But his point of view towards the goals of the new Society is remarkably fresh, and is expressed with typical Thurstone clarity. The reference to the complete paper is:Thurstone, L. L. (1937). Psychology as a quantitative rational science.Science, 85, 227–232. (Copyright 1937 by the American Association for the Advancement of Science.)     

Impact of Excessive Journal Self-Citations: A Case Study on the Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica Journal

There is an increasing trend towards assessing the scientific performance of researchers and institutions of higher learning in the form of journal publications and the associated citations. Currently, the journal impact factor (JIF) value is the most widely used measure for any academic contents. However, there are growing concerns for the unethical practices adopted by journal editors to manipulate the JIF computations. Recently, a Swiss journal, Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica which has a JIF value of 0.655 in the year 2006 registers a remarkable JIF increment (of 119%) to 1.439 in the year 2007. It is believed that the journal can achieve such a prominent JIF improvement by publishing a single editorial article that self-cited 66 of its own articles published either in the year 2005 or 2006. The journal has been revoked of any JIF value in the following year of 2008. Thus, it is interesting to review the possible alternative bibliographical trend for the journal should the self-cite event has been avoided, the circumstances leading to the decision by the editor to publish such an article and the possible ethical implications or lessons that can be derived from this incident.