Editorial.

In this editorial, the author notes that rejection rates in the Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology have been high for some time and provides a commentary on some specific problems of authorship and editorship in the hope that it may be of value to reader and writer alike. The topics include piecemeal publication, single correlations, negative results, overspecific conclusions, and faddism and one-shot papers. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Editorial.

This editorial begins with a summary historical background of Behavioral Neuroscience. The editor then expresses his intention to continue to represent the behavioral neuroscience discipline as broadly as possible by implementing a few changes in the publication. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Editorial.

In this editorial, the editor of the Journal of Applied Psychology (JAP) provides a few comments relevant to both the content and review process in order to be helpful to prospective authors. As to content, reports of empirical research and specialized reviews in all areas of applied psychology, clinical and counseling, are appropriate to the Journal of Applied Psychology. The editor also provides some comments on the various factors that determine whether or not a paper gets published. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Editorial.

The editor of the Journal of Abnormal Psychology explains the basis for his decisions and provides guidelines for potential contributors to the journal over the next five years. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Credit, Credit, Who Gets the Credit?

With their questionnaire, Bridgwater, Bornstein, and Walkenbach have answered empirically most of the complex ethical questions surrounding the assignment of publication credit. The current author questions their assignment of publication credit. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Needed: Publication of negative results.

It is suggested that the value of negative results has been underestimated. The authors feel that negative findings can add to our knowledge by indicating unfruitful aspects of a given problem, thereby eliminating wasted research time and energy. In building up the empirical foundation of a science, it is important to know not only what does exist, but what does not exist as well. A way of coping with this problem would be to have a place to publish these findings. They further suggest that this could be done by establishing a Journal of Negative Results. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Ethical Issues in Couple and Family Research.

Federal regulations, ethical standards, and state laws governing ethics do not adequately address important issues in couple and family research. Including multiple family members, particularly dependent minors, in research requires the special application of fundamental ethical issues, such as confidentiality, privacy, and informed consent. The sensitive, commingled nature of couple and family information necessitates clear policies about data ownership and disclosure. Researchers need to have respect for the family as a unit and to evaluate benefits versus harms for the family as well as for individuals. This article highlights areas of potential concern and ambiguity related to abuse reporting and Certificates of Confidentiality and also addresses ethical issues with observational data, intervention studies, longitudinal designs, and computer-assisted research. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Editorial statement of the American Psychologist: III.

Presents an editorial statement about the publication policies of the American Psychologist (AP). About half the contents of the AP are documents that report on the activities of the Association—the minutes of the Council of Representatives, the address of the immediate Past President, and those reports of the Association boards and committees of concern to a large percentage of the membership. The remaining pieces are articles that the editorial board and the ad hoc reviewers judge to be of sufficient interest and consequence to appeal to the large and heterogeneous readership of the AP. These articles should explicitly address the broadest scientific and practical implications of the topic under consideration. In addition, a new series, tentatively called "Science Watch," will appear in the AP on an irregular basis. The purpose will be to cover articles that broaden our understanding of the discipline, that enable us to understand the connections between our discipline and others, and that help us glimpse the directions in which our science is moving. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Measuring individual research productivity: A review and development of the integrated research productivity index.

The purpose of the present study was to investigate methods of measuring individual research productivity for counseling psychologists. Using the 60 members of the Journal of Counseling Psychology editorial board, the authors computed a comparison of 6 popular indices of productivity, revealing considerable levels of positive skewness, kurtosis, and overlap with each other. Combining the strengths of the 6 indices, the authors developed a new productivity index entitled the Integrated Research Productivity Index (IRPI). The IRPI measures individual productivity by statistically combining an individual's author-weighted publications, average times cited by other publications, and years since first publication into a comprehensive score. Productivity values and IRPI scores for 3 groups of counseling psychologists (Tyler Award recipients, Kuder Award recipients, and Division 17 Presidents) were computed to provide evidence of discriminant validity among the indices. In contrast to the other measures examined, the IRPI accounts for productivity per year and years in the field and assesses mean citation count per article as opposed to total citation count, thus yielding similar scores for Tyler (lifetime) and Kuder (early career) research award recipients. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

"Golden" Editorial.

This issue marks the beginning of the 50th volume of Rehabilitation Psychology (RP). This editorial reflects on the past 50 years of the journal's history. The editor also discusses the journal's future and notes that this is the last year RP will be published by the Educational Publishing Foundation, a subsidiary of the American Psychological Association. Starting next year, RP will be an APA publication. The editor looks forward to gaining a larger and wider audience. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Dissemination of primary research data in psychology.

"During the past decade the development of new techniques in microreproduction has offered psychologists the revolutionary possibility of publishing large amounts of material in small editions at very low cost… . Three distinct patterns for the publication of primary records now seem possible." First, workers holding sets of data may independently arrange with microtext publishers; second, individuals or groups may initiate highly specialized series of primary records; third, a stable publication series may be developed under the sponsorship of our professional societies. Data often inadequately or incompletely exploited may be made available to other research workers by such arrangement. As many as 30 to 60 pages of material can be put on a single microcard. The major disadvantage of microscopy as a medium of scholarly publication is the expensiveness of good microcard readers. At present inexpensive desk readers are in developmental stages. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Editorial.

Psychology, Public Policy, and Law focuses on the links between psychology as a science, relevant information derived from related disciplines as sciences, and public policy and law. It will publish articles that (1) critically evaluate the actual and potential contributions of psychology to public policy and legal issues, (2) assess the desirability of different public policy and legal alternatives in light of the scientific knowledge base in psychology, (3) articulate research needs that address public policy and legal issues for which there is currently insufficient theoretical and empirical knowledge, and (4) examine public policy and legal issues relating to the conduct of psychology and of related disciplines where relevant to psychology. The goals for the journal are to (1) provide a multidisciplinary forum for scholarship and interchange relevant to the mission of the journal, (2) provide a forum for the publications of comprehensive, scholarly articles that critically consider theoretical, conceptual, and doctrinal issues or that critically review the literature on topics relevant to the mission of the journal, and (3) provide a forum for the publication of comprehensive, scholarly articles that report the results of programs of research or large-scale empirical studies relevant to the mission of the journal. This particular issue provides a forum for critical discussion of the implications of using a social science amicus brief in court cases. It also demonstrates the opportunity that this journal will provide to social scientists to critically evaluate their colleagues' work when those colleagues attempt to offer their science and opinions in the legal or public policy arenas. Finally, this issue reflects the journal's desire to be a flexible forum for scholarly interchange. Rather than always publishing articles that are relatively independent of each other, the journal will also publish issues devoted to a single theme (as occurred in the first issue of this volume), and, as in the case of this issue, to interchange about one theme when it is appropriate for advancing the field. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Reweaving deception's tangled web.

Recent trends in social psychological research toward greater use of field settings and unobtrusive measurement was reviewed. The following issues bear on this concern: (1) the general public may be more intolerant of being used as research subjects than are college students; (2) disguised observation may tend to aggravate a post-Watergate concern over invasion of privacy; (3) greater harm to participants in some field research may be likely because laboratory control is greatly lacking; (4) because concern with revealing social psychological data to the public may jeopardize future research, scant feedback is provided to participants. Other ethical problems and possible solutions were mentioned. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Editorial.

The purpose of this issue is to provide an overview of some of the research in social development being conducted in major laboratories in Canada. A number of investigators whose work does not appear here seemed obvious candidates for inclusion. Space limitations, however, required a somewhat arbitrary selection of contributors, and those ultimately invited address themselves to one or more of the major themes or issues which currently figure in the area of social development. As a result, the present volume provides a quite comprehensive survey of the field as a whole, as well as attesting to the vigorous activity of Canadian researchers. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)