Nathan A. Bowling, PhD

Bowling, incoming editor of the International Journal of Stress Management (IJSM), plans to expand the journal’s practice of involving graduate students as co-reviewers.

Tell us a bit about your background: What is your area of research? What is your most recent journal-editing experience?

I am currently an associate professor of psychology at the University of Central Florida (to be promoted to professor in August 2025), where I serve as associate director of the Industrial–Organizational (I–O) Psychology PhD Program. My research focuses on various aspects of occupational stress. I’m especially interested in the assessment, predictors, and consequences of various work stressors—particularly organizational constraints (i.e., environmental conditions or events that prevent workers from effectively performing their jobs, such as having inadequate training, equipment, or help from coworkers; see Bowling et al., 2024), exposure to workplace aggression (see Bowling & Beehr, 2006), and excessive workload (see Bowling et al., 2015). I’ve been awarded multiple research grants from the U.S. Department of Defense, so much of my current research involves applications of I–O psychology within military contexts.

I also have considerable editing experience. I have served as an associate editor for multiple peer-reviewed journals, most recently the Journal of Occupational Health Psychology. In addition, I have served as guest editor for three special issues, and I have coedited three books. My most recent book is How to Conduct and Publish High-Quality Research in Industrial–Organizational Psychology (Bowling, Shoss, & Zhou, in press).

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? 

Stress management intersects with nearly every subfield of psychological science, including I–O, human factors, developmental, social, personality, health, counseling, and clinical psychology. Given stress management’s far-reaching relevance, I anticipate publishing papers from any life domain in which stress can occur (e.g., educational, work, and family contexts). And rather than focusing the journal on a few substantive areas, I will instead prioritize the publication of papers that effectively use theory and rigorous methodology to address contemporary, real-world problems that involve stress management. Consistent with this objective, I welcome the submission of both basic and applied research papers, and I strongly encourage the submission of interdisciplinary papers. Focusing on these objectives will grow IJSM’s readership and increase the journal’s scientific impact.

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?

Stress is a wide-ranging and costly problem. The APA’s 2024 Stress in America poll, for instance, found that a large percentage of American adults reported experiencing several significant sources of stress, including excessive housing costs, national politics, and social divisiveness. Fortunately, psychological science is well positioned to address these problems. By developing theory-based, empirically driven solutions, our field will continue to lead efforts to mitigate the negative effects of stress.

Part of this mitigation effort will require researchers to continue studying contemporary problems facing our society, such as technostress, prejudice and racism, economic stressors, and political unrest. Although we live in turbulent times, psychology’s existing theories and research methodologies are well suited to address these and other “hot issues.”

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 plan to pursue several journal initiatives. First, I will introduce a new preregistered study submission format. In this format, the author would submit a partial paper that includes only the introduction, method, and proposed analysis sections. We would evaluate such submissions according to their potential theoretical and practical contributions, the strength of the conceptual basis of their hypotheses, the rigor of their methodology, and the appropriateness of their analytic plan. The results of the research (i.e., the extent to which the study hypotheses were supported), however, would not affect editorial decisions. The preregistered option may help address problems associated with research integrity, such as the file drawer effect, and could be useful in providing critical tests of seemingly “established” phenomena (for an example paper, see Hagger et al., 2016).

I will also pursue a reproducible research initiative, which would encourage authors to share their research materials (e.g., measures, stimulus materials, computer code, and de-identified data) in a publicly available online archive. Other journals have successfully implemented similar initiatives (e.g., Journal of Business and Psychology).

Finally, I will expand IJSM’s practice of involving graduate students as co-reviewers. Participation in the peer review process provides graduate students with hands-on experience that will help them further develop their research and reviewing skills. Although IJSM currently invites reviewers to recruit a graduate student to assist in the peer review process, this option is underutilized. To increase graduate student participation in the process, I will expand existing efforts to publicize the co-reviewer initiative. Among other things, IJSM will begin using a revised reviewer invitation letter that asks perspective reviewers to consider recruiting a graduate student co-reviewer to assist them with their review.

What advice would you offer new authors hoping to publish in your journal? What are you looking for in a manuscript?

Strong manuscripts are built around a compelling idea, they present convincing data, and they are well written:

• A compelling idea. Strong submissions tackle compelling research ideas—that is, they help resolve a meaningful scientific gap. Compelling ideas can take many forms (see Joireman & Van Lange, 2015). They may, for instance, pit completing theories against each other, discuss the mechanisms (i.e., mediators) underlying a well-established effect, or provide a ready solution to a practical problem.
• Convincing data. Strong submissions use convincing empirical evidence to achieve their research objectives. When planning research, consider the appropriateness of your methodology. Is it sufficient, for example, to use a cross-sectional design? Or is a longitudinal design needed? Is it sufficient to rely on self-report data? Or are other forms of data (e.g., physiological or dyadic data) needed? The answers to these questions depend on a study’s objectives. So design your studies to align with the goals of your research and then convincingly defend your methodological decisions.
• Good writing. The law of parsimony applies to writing: The best research articles often have a simple, unifying idea that the authors have articulated clearly. Few things are more frustrating to readers—and reviewers—than having to muddle through a paper that they only half understand. So do the “heavy lifting” for readers to maximize the accessibility and long-term impact of your work.   

Bowling, N. A., Alarcon, G. M., Bragg, C. B., & Hartman, M. J. (2015). A meta-analytic examination of the potential correlates and consequences of workload. Work & Stress, 29(2), 95–113. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2015.1033037opens in new window

Bowling, N. A., & Beehr, T. A. (2006). Workplace harassment from the victim’s perspective: A theoretical model and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(5), 998–1012. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.5.998

Bowling, N. A., Michel, J. S., Islam, M. R., Rotch, M. A., Wagner, S. H., & Zelazny, L. (2024). What’s holding you back? Development of the Multi-Facet Organizational Constraints Scale (MOCS). Journal of Business and Psychology, 39(6), 1211–1238. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-024-09961-8opens in new window

Bowling, N. A., Shoss, M. K., & Zhou, Z. E. (in press). How to conduct and publish high-quality research in industrial–organizational psychology. Elgar.

Hagger, M. S., Chatzisarantis, N. L., Alberts, H., Anggono, C. O., Batailler, C., Birt, A. R., Brand, R., Brandt, M. J., Brewer, G., Bruyneel, S., Calvillo, D. P., Cannon, P. R., Carlucci, M., Carruth, N. P., Cheung, T., Crowell, A., De Ridder, D. T. D., Dewitte, S., Elson, M., . . . Zwienenberg, M. (2016). A multilab preregistered replication of the ego-depletion effect. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11, 546–573. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691616652873opens in new window

Joireman, J., & Van Lange, P. A. (2015). How to publish high-quality research. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/14525-000