Richard E. Lucas, PhD
Lucas is a professor of psychology at Michigan State University.
Background
Tell us a bit about your background: What is your area of research? What is your most recent journal-editing experience?
I am a personality psychologist, and I focus specifically on happiness and subjective well-being. Much of my research explores whether subjective well-being can change, especially after major life events, and I typically use longitudinal data from panel studies to examine this topic. I am also interested in measurement issues, and I look at how people respond to subjective well-being questionnaires to understand the validity of these measures and the processes that underlie people’s responses. I have also been involved in discussions about research practices and replicability, and I devote some of my research efforts to these issues.
I have always enjoyed reviewing and editing, and I have done quite a bit of both. I was an associate editor for the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (JPSP): Personality Processes and Individual Differences many years ago; I became editor in chief of the Journal of Research in Personality for 9 years after that. I have also served as an associate editor for Perspectives on Psychological Science and Collabra: Psychology.
Priorities
Briefly, what are your main priorities? For example, how will you grow readership, what type of scholarship would you like to see in the journal, and what kind of content are you hoping to attract?
In the past, people may have thought of personality research as focusing mainly on self-report questionnaire measures. However, in the last decade or so, personality researchers have broadened their approaches and now use a wide range of methods and data sources to understand stable individual differences. My vision for the journal is to encourage even greater use of these diverse methods. I also hope that by encouraging researchers to use diverse methods and theoretical approaches, the journal will attract a diverse group of researchers and researchers working with diverse samples, as achieving diversity in both researchers and participants is an important goal for the journal.
Journal importance
Why is this journal important for the field? What is its relevance to society/public health? What are the hot issues in your area right now?
JPSP has traditionally been seen as the premier outlet for empirical research in personality psychology. As such, publishing in JPSP is often considered especially important for personality psychologists’ careers. At the same time, more outlets for personality research emerge every year; many of these work from different publishing models or use different practices in the review process. I am very interested in discussions about peer review practices and hope to incorporate the best of these new approaches into the workflow at JPSP. I am especially excited about the journal’s adoption of Level 2 for most of the Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) Guidelines and the addition of registered reports as a submission option.
In terms of critical issues with relevance to society and public health, personality psychologists have always been interested in the ways that individual differences are associated with consequential life outcomes. Thus, understanding the processes by which personality characteristics are linked with these outcomes provides some insight into how these outcomes might be improved. Moreover, debates about personality stability have implications for how difficult change can be in certain areas, and I think that personality research highlights the challenges that scientists face when trying to change people’s thoughts, feelings, and behaviors, along with the most promising approaches for doing so.
Challenges
What challenges, if any, lie ahead for the field?
Researchers, editors, and publishers in all fields of psychology have responded to concerns about replicability with many new initiatives to increase the transparency and ideally the replicability of published psychological research. I am happy to see APA adopting many recommended policies and look forward to implementing them at JPSP. However, adjusting to these new practices will take some time, and not everyone agrees about the precise way to move forward. This can create a bit more uncertainty about what is expected during the peer review process and how submissions will be judged. I am hopeful that our team can respond to these challenges effectively and make that transition as smooth as possible.
Plans
Do you have plans for a special issue or changes to the editorial process? Have you introduced or are you planning to introduce any changes?
I think that the major changes to the editorial process involve the adoption of new TOP Guidelines. Specifically, JPSP has adopted Level 2 of the TOP guidelines, which means that there will be increased expectations regarding sharing of materials and disclosure of preregistration plans. JPSP is also now accepting registered reports. These have a somewhat different review process that will require some adjustments by authors, reviewers, and editors. And through discussion with the current team, other editors, and the authors who submit, I will always be on the lookout for ways to further improve the peer review process and the articles ultimately published in JPSP.
