Journal of Psychopathology and Clinical Science

Prior to submission, please carefully read and follow the submission guidelines detailed below. Manuscripts that do not conform to the submission guidelines may be returned without review.

Submission

To submit to the editorial office of Aidan G. C. Wright, please submit manuscripts electronically through the Manuscript Submission Portal in Microsoft Word or Open Office format.

The Journal of Psychopathology and Clinical Science is now format free for initial submissions. That means that for first submissions manuscripts can be submitted in any reasonable format and will not be returned for formatting style.

If you are invited to revise your manuscript after an initial round of reviews, you will be asked to format the manuscript according to the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association using the 7^th edition. Accepted manuscripts may be copyedited for bias-free language (see Chapter 5 of the Publication Manual). APA Style and Grammar Guidelines for the 7^th edition are available.

Handling editors will use a checklist to assist in tracking adherence to key submission requirements related to reporting standards and transparency. We make the checklist available to submitting authors to assist in manuscript preparation.

Submit Manuscript

Aidan G. C. Wright, PhD
Editor, Journal of Psychopathology and Clinical Science
Department of Psychology
University of Michigan
2nd Floor, East Hall
530 Church Street
Ann Arbor, MI 48109

General correspondence may be directed to the editor's office.

The Journal of Psychopathology and Clinical Science is now using a software system to screen submitted content for similarity with other published content. The system compares the initial version of each submitted manuscript against a database of 40+ million scholarly documents, as well as content appearing on the open web. This allows APA to check submissions for potential overlap with material previously published in scholarly journals (e.g., lifted or republished material).

Masked reviews

Masked reviews are optional and must be specifically requested in the cover letter accompanying the submission. For masked reviews, the manuscript must include a separate title page with the authors' names and affiliations, and these ought not to appear anywhere else in the manuscript.

Footnotes that identify the authors must be typed on a separate page.

Make every effort to see that the manuscript itself contains no clues to authors' identities, including grant numbers, names of institutions providing IRB approval, self-citations that indicate that the citation pertains to the authors, and links to online repositories for data, materials, code, or preregistrations (e.g., Create a View-only Link for a Project).

Types of articles

Viewpoint papers

Viewpoint papers are brief papers about important topics related to psychopathology and clinical psychology and discuss new developments in research, innovations, weaknesses of the field, and current debates. The goal of viewpoint papers is to provide a platform for and generate discourse about important issues in the field, which are supported by empirical evidence but go beyond that. Viewpoint papers should be brief (no more than 1200 words, including references but exclusive of title page, no more than 10 references, no abstract, and no more than three authors). They do not require pre-approval for submission, but authors considering submitting a viewpoint paper are welcome to reach out to the Editor, Aidan Wright, in advance to discuss it.

Brief report

The manuscript should not exceed 5,000 words when including the abstract, body of the text, tables, table captions, figure captions, footnotes, author notes, appendices, and references in a word count.

Note that supplementary materials and figures are not included in the word count.

Brief reports can have a maximum of two figures (there is no table limit).

Regular article

The manuscript should not exceed 9,000 words when including the abstract, body of the text, tables, table captions, figure captions, footnotes, author notes, appendices, and references in a word count.

Note that supplementary materials and figures are not included in the word count.

Extended article

Extended articles are published within regular issues of the journal (they are not free-standing). This article type is reserved for manuscripts that require extended exposition beyond the length of a regular article (e.g., reporting results of multiple experiments, multifaceted longitudinal studies, cross-disciplinary investigations, or studies that are extraordinarily complex in terms of methodology or analysis).

Extended article submissions do not require preclearance from the editorial office. However, they should include a cover letter that provides a justification for this format.

Submissions that exceed 9,000 words without a justification will be returned for shortening.

Commentary

Commentaries on articles previously published in the Journal of Psychopathology and Clinical Science are also considered for publication. Commentaries may contain original data relevant to the topic at hand but are not required to do so. They are subject to the same editorial criteria and standards as any other manuscript. If a commentary is deemed acceptable for publication, authors of the original submission are given the opportunity to reply to the commentary. Commentaries and replies should typically have a maximum of three authors, 1,200 words, and 10 references. Deviations from this format may be requested by emailing the editor. A commentary and reply will be published together. Except under rare circumstances, there will be only one round of comment and reply.

Replications and Registered Reports

The Journal of Psychopathology and Clinical Science publishes direct replications. Submissions should include “A Replication of XX Study” in the subtitle of the manuscript as well as in the abstract.

The Journal of Psychopathology and Clinical Science also publishes Registered Reports. Registered reports require a two-step review process. The first step is the submission of the registration manuscript. This is a partial manuscript that includes hypotheses, rationale for the study, experimental design, and methods. The partial manuscript will be reviewed for rigor and methodological approach.

If the partial manuscript is accepted, this amounts to provisional acceptance of the full report regardless of the outcome of the study. The full manuscript will be reviewed for adherence to the preregistered design (deviations should be reported in the manuscript).

Cover letters

Cover letters are not required, though authors are welcome to include one if there is additional relevant information related to processing or handling the article that it would be helpful for the editorial team to know.

Open science badges

Articles are eligible for open science badges recognizing publicly available data, materials, and/or preregistration plans and analyses. These badges are awarded on a self-disclosure basis.

At submission, authors must confirm that criteria have been fulfilled in a signed badge disclosure form (PDF, 42KB) that must be submitted as supplemental material. If all criteria are met as confirmed by the editor, the form will then be published with the article as supplemental material.

Authors should also note their eligibility for the badge(s) in the cover letter.

For all badges, items must be made available on an open-access repository with a persistent identifier in a format that is time-stamped, immutable, and permanent. For the preregistered badge, this is an institutional registration system.

Data and materials must be made available under an open license allowing others to copy, share, and use the data, with attribution and copyright as applicable.

Available badges are:

Open Data:
All data necessary to reproduce the reported results that are digitally shareable are made publicly available. Information necessary for replication (e.g., codebooks or metadata) must be included.

Open Data: Protected Access:
A Protected Access (PA) notation may be added to open data badges if sensitive, personal data are available only from an approved third-party repository that manages access to data to qualified researchers through a documented process. To be eligible for an open data badge with such a notation, the repository must publicly describe the steps necessary to obtain the data and detailed data documentation (e.g. variable names and allowed values) must be made available publicly.

Open Materials:
All materials necessary to reproduce the reported results that are digitally shareable, along with descriptions of non-digital materials necessary for replication, are made publicly available.

Preregistered:
At least one study’s design has been preregistered with descriptions of (a) the research design and study materials, including the planned sample size; (b) the motivating research question or hypothesis; (c) the outcome variable(s); and (d) the predictor variables, including controls, covariates, and independent variables. Results must be fully disclosed. As long as they are distinguished from other results in the article, results from analyses that were not preregistered may be reported in the article.

Preregistered+Analysis Plan:
At least one study’s design has been preregistered along with an analysis plan for the research—and results are recorded according to that plan.

Note that it may not be possible to preregister a study or to share data and materials. Applying for open science badges is optional.

Manuscript preparation

As noted above, initial submissions of manuscripts no longer have formatting requirements. Any reasonably clear and easy to follow format will suffice. Manuscripts that are invited for resubmission following an initial round of review will be asked to conform to the following guidelines.

Prepare manuscripts according to the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association using the 7th edition. Manuscripts may be copyedited for bias-free language (see Chapter 5 of the Publication Manual).

Double-space all copy. Other formatting instructions, as well as instructions on preparing tables, figures, references, metrics, and abstracts, appear in the Manual. Additional guidance on APA Style is available on the APA Style website.

Below are additional instructions regarding the preparation of display equations, computer code, and tables.

Display equations

We strongly encourage you to use MathType (third-party software) or Equation Editor 3.0 (built into pre-2007 versions of Word) to construct your equations, rather than the equation support that is built into Word 2007 and Word 2010. Equations composed with the built-in Word 2007/Word 2010 equation support are converted to low-resolution graphics when they enter the production process and must be rekeyed by the typesetter, which may introduce errors.

To construct your equations with MathType or Equation Editor 3.0:

• Go to the Text section of the Insert tab and select Object.
• Select MathType or Equation Editor 3.0 in the drop-down menu.

If you have an equation that has already been produced using Microsoft Word 2007 or 2010 and you have access to the full version of MathType 6.5 or later, you can convert this equation to MathType by clicking on MathType Insert Equation. Copy the equation from Microsoft Word and paste it into the MathType box. Verify that your equation is correct, click File, and then click Update. Your equation has now been inserted into your Word file as a MathType Equation.

Use Equation Editor 3.0 or MathType only for equations or for formulas that cannot be produced as Word text using the Times or Symbol font.

Computer code

Because altering computer code in any way (e.g., indents, line spacing, line breaks, page breaks) during the typesetting process could alter its meaning, we treat computer code differently from the rest of your article in our production process. To that end, we request separate files for computer code.

In online supplemental material

We request that runnable source code be included as supplemental material to the article. For more information, visit Supplementing Your Article With Online Material.

In the text of the article

If you would like to include code in the text of your published manuscript, please submit a separate file with your code exactly as you want it to appear, using Courier New font with a type size of 8 points. We will make an image of each segment of code in your article that exceeds 40 characters in length. (Shorter snippets of code that appear in text will be typeset in Courier New and run in with the rest of the text.) If an appendix contains a mix of code and explanatory text, please submit a file that contains the entire appendix, with the code keyed in 8-point Courier New.

Tables

Use Word's insert table function when you create tables. Using spaces or tabs in your table will create problems when the table is typeset and may result in errors.

Academic writing and English language editing services

Authors who feel that their manuscript may benefit from additional academic writing or language editing support prior to submission are encouraged to seek out such services at their host institutions, engage with colleagues and subject matter experts, and/or consider several vendors that offer discounts to APA authors.

Please note that APA does not endorse or take responsibility for the service providers listed. It is strictly a referral service.

Use of such service is not mandatory for publication in an APA journal. Use of one or more of these services does not guarantee selection for peer review, manuscript acceptance, or preference for publication in any APA journal.

Submitting supplemental materials

APA can place supplemental materials online, available via the published article in the PsycArticles^® database. Please see Supplementing Your Article With Online Material for more details.

Abstract and keywords

All manuscripts must include an abstract containing a maximum of 250 words typed on a separate page. After the abstract, please supply up to five keywords or brief phrases.

Author contribution statements using CRediT

The APA Publication Manual (7th ed.), which stipulates that "authorship encompasses…not only persons who do the writing but also those who have made substantial scientific contributions to a study." In the spirit of transparency and openness, the Journal of Psychopathology and Clinical Science has adopted the Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT) to describe each author's individual contributions to the work. CRediT offers authors the opportunity to share an accurate and detailed description of their diverse contributions to a manuscript.

Submitting authors will be asked to identify the contributions of all authors at initial submission according to the CRediT taxonomy. If the manuscript is accepted for publication, the CRediT designations will be published as an author contributions statement in the author note of the final article. All authors should have reviewed and agreed to their individual contribution(s) before submission.

CRediT includes 14 contributor roles, as described below:

• Conceptualization: Ideas; formulation or evolution of overarching research goals and aims.
• Data curation: Management activities to annotate (produce metadata), scrub data and maintain research data (including software code, where it is necessary for interpreting the data itself) for initial use and later re-use.
• Formal analysis: Application of statistical, mathematical, computational, or other formal techniques to analyze or synthesize study data.
• Funding acquisition: Acquisition of the financial support for the project leading to this publication.
• Investigation: Conducting a research and investigation process, specifically performing the experiments, or data/evidence collection.
• Methodology: Development or design of methodology; creation of models.
• Project administration: Management and coordination responsibility for the research activity planning and execution.
• Resources: Provision of study materials, reagents, materials, patients, laboratory samples, animals, instrumentation, computing resources, or other analysis tools.
• Software: Programming, software development; designing computer programs; implementation of the computer code and supporting algorithms; testing of existing code components.
• Supervision: Oversight and leadership responsibility for the research activity planning and execution, including mentorship external to the core team.
• Validation: Verification, whether as a part of the activity or separate, of the overall replication/reproducibility of results/experiments and other research outputs.
• Visualization: Preparation, creation and/or presentation of the published work, specifically visualization/data presentation.
• Writing—original draft: Preparation, creation and/or presentation of the published work, specifically writing the initial draft (including substantive translation).
• Writing—review and editing: Preparation, creation and/or presentation of the published work by those from the original research group, specifically critical review, commentary or revision: including pre- or post-publication stages.

Authors can claim credit for more than one contributor role, and the same role can be attributed to more than one author.

General Scientific Summaries

Please provide a General Scientific Summary (GSS) of the paper on the manuscript file below the abstract.

This should be a brief (2–3 sentences) statement that, in nontechnical language, explains the contributions of the paper.

This is not a simplified version of the abstract, which highlights the details of your study and its findings for other specialists who know the history of the research, will be able to comprehend a description of methodology, and can determine the significance of your results amidst more technical language.

Rather, assume that the reader is an intelligent, interested individual who might know something about abnormal psychology, but may not know technical terms or abbreviations such as ERP, SEM, endophenotype, error-related negativity, or mediation.

Examples are included below:

"This study suggests that some approaches to subtyping eating disorders in adolescence, specifically those that include _____, _____, and _____, may be more useful than _____in predicting outcomes in young adulthood."

"Decreased motivation to seek out rewarding experiences is a key symptom in depression. This study supports the notion that for depressed individuals, this decrease in motivation is more likely due to lower anticipation that an activity will be pleasurable than by the ability to actually experience pleasure during the activity itself."

References

List references in alphabetical order. Each listed reference should be cited in text, and each text citation should be listed in the references section.

Examples of basic reference formats:

Journal article

McCauley, S. M., & Christiansen, M. H. (2019). Language learning as language use: A cross-linguistic model of child language development. Psychological Review, 126(1), 1–51. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000126

Authored book

Brown, L. S. (2018). Feminist therapy (2nd ed.). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000092-000

Chapter in an edited book

Balsam, K. F., Martell, C. R., Jones. K. P., & Safren, S. A. (2019). Affirmative cognitive behavior therapy with sexual and gender minority people. In G. Y. Iwamasa & P. A. Hays (Eds.), Culturally responsive cognitive behavior therapy: Practice and supervision (2nd ed., pp. 287–314). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000119-012

All data, program code and other methods must be cited in the text and listed in the references section.

Data set citation

Alegria, M., Jackson, J. S., Kessler, R. C., & Takeuchi, D. (2016). Collaborative Psychiatric Epidemiology Surveys (CPES), 2001–2003 [Data set]. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR20240.v8

Software/Code citation

Viechtbauer, W. (2010). Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package.  Journal of Statistical Software, 36(3), 1–48. https://www.jstatsoft.org/v36/i03/

Wickham, H. et al., (2019). Welcome to the tidyverse. Journal of Open Source Software, 4(43), 1686, https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01686

Figures

Preferred formats for graphics files are TIFF and JPG, and preferred format for vector-based files is EPS. Graphics downloaded or saved from web pages are not acceptable for publication. Multipanel figures (i.e., figures with parts labeled a, b, c, d, etc.) should be assembled into one file. When possible, please place symbol legends below the figure instead of to the side.

Resolution

• All color line art and halftones: 300 DPI
• Black and white line tone and gray halftone images: 600 DPI

Line weights

• Adobe Photoshop images
  • Color (RGB, CMYK) images: 2 pixels
  • Grayscale images: 4 pixels
• Adobe Illustrator Images
  • Stroke weight: 0.5 points

APA offers authors the option to publish their figures online in color without the costs associated with print publication of color figures.

The same caption will appear on both the online (color) and print (black and white) versions. To ensure that the figure can be understood in both formats, authors should add alternative wording (e.g., “the red (dark gray) bars represent”) as needed.

For authors who prefer their figures to be published in color both in print and online, original color figures can be printed in color at the editor's and publisher's discretion provided the author agrees to pay:

• $900 for one figure
• An additional $600 for the second figure
• An additional $450 for each subsequent figure

Journal Article Reporting Standards

Authors must adhere to the APA Style Journal Article Reporting Standards (JARS) for quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods. The standards offer ways to improve transparency in reporting to ensure that readers have the information necessary to evaluate the quality of the research and to facilitate collaboration and replication.

The JARS:

• recommend the division of hypotheses, analyses and conclusions into primary, secondary, and exploratory groupings to allow for a full understanding of quantitative analyses presented in a manuscript and to enhance reproducibility;
• offer modules for authors reporting on replications, clinical trials, longitudinal studies, and observational studies, as well as the analytic methods of structural equation modeling and Bayesian analysis; and
• include guidelines on reporting on of study preregistration (including making protocols public); participant characteristics (including demographic characteristics; inclusion and exclusion criteria) psychometric characteristics of outcome measures and other variables, and planned data diagnostics and analytic strategy.

The guidelines focus on transparency in methods reporting, recommending descriptions of how the researchers’ own perspectives affected the study, as well as the contexts in which the research and analysis took place.

Please note that for quantitative JARS, this includes the reliability estimates for the measures in the sample(s) analyzed in the study (note this includes methods like self-reports and interviews as well as tasks and behavioral paradigms), effect size estimates, confidence/credibility intervals, exact p-values (to at least three digits). Additionally, we interpret the standard of including the sample size in the abstract to mean the final analyzed sample size(s). If the study uses a subset of a larger sample (e.g., only examining those with particular demographics, a portion of participants were excluded for poor data quality), then the sample size reported in the abstract should not be the larger sample size but only the size after exclusions were made.

Reporting year(s) of data collection

Authors are encouraged to disclose the year(s) of data collection in both the Abstract and in the Method section to appropriately contextualize the study. 

Constraints on generality

In a subsection of the discussion titled "Constraints on generality," authors should include a detailed discussion of the limits on generality (see Simons, Shoda, & Lindsay, 2017). In this section, authors should detail grounds for concluding why the results are may or may not be specific to the characteristics of the participants. They should address limits on generality not only for participants but for materials, procedures, and context. Authors should also specify which methods they think could be varied without affecting the result and which should remain constant.

Participant description, sample justification, and informed consent

Authors must include a detailed description of the study participants in the Method section of each empirical report, including (but not limited to) the following:

• age
• sex
• gender
• racial identity
• ethnicity
• nativity or immigration history
• socioeconomic status
• clinical diagnoses and comorbidities (as appropriate)
• any other relevant demographics (e.g., disability status; sexual orientation)

If some of these were not collected, the manuscript should state that they were not collected. In both the abstract and in the discussion section of the manuscript, authors must discuss the diversity of their study samples and the generalizability of their findings (see also the constraints on generality section below).

Authors must justify their sample demographics in the Discussion section. If Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic (WEIRD) or all-White samples are used, authors should justify their samples and describe their sample inclusion efforts (see Roberts, et al., 2020 for more information on justifying sample demographics).

The Method section also must include a statement describing how informed consent was obtained from the participants (or their parents/guardians), including for secondary use of data if applicable, and indicate that the study was conducted in compliance with an appropriate Internal Review Board.

Transparency and openness

APA endorses the Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) Guidelines developed by a community working group in conjunction with the Center for Open Science (Nosek et al. 2015). Empirical research, including meta-analyses, submitted to the Journal of Psychopathology and Clinical Science must at least meet the “requirement” level for all aspects of research planning and reporting. Authors should include a subsection in the method section titled “Transparency and openness.” This subsection should detail the efforts the authors have made to comply with the TOP guidelines. For example:

We report how we determined our sample size, all data exclusions (if any), all manipulations, and all measures in the study, and we follow JARS (Appelbaum et al., 2018). All data, analysis code, and research materials are available at [stable link to repository]. Data were analyzed using R, version 4.0.0 (R Core Team, 2020) and the package ggplot, version 3.2.1 (Wickham, 2016). This study’s design and its analysis were not pre-registered.

Links to preregistrations and data, code, and materials should also be included in the author note.

Data, materials, and code

Authors must state whether data and study materials are posted to a trusted repository and, if so, how to access them. If they cannot be made available, authors must state the legal or ethical reasons why they are not available. All submissions must include the code and output of the models reported in the manuscript. These must be in a widely legible format (e.g., file that can be opened with basic text editing software or saved as a PDF). The only exception to this requirement is for code to calculate basic descriptive statistics (e.g., means, variances, standard deviations, Pearson correlations). Code may be submitted as supplemental materials or submitted to a trusted repository. Trusted repositories adhere to policies that make data discoverable, accessible, usable, and preserved for the long term. Trusted repositories also assign unique and persistent identifiers. Recommended repositories include APA’s repository on the Open Science Framework (OSF).

In a subsection titled "Transparency and Openness" at the end of the method section, specify whether and where the data and material will be available or include a statement noting that they are not available and why. For example:

• All data have been made publicly available at the [trusted repository name] and can be accessed at [persistent URL or DOI].
• Materials for this study are not openly available. Interested parties may request access by emailing the corresponding author.
• Materials for this study are not available because they are restricted access by the publisher.
• The code behind this analysis/simulation has been made publicly available at the [trusted repository name] and can be accessed at [persistent URL or DOI].

Preregistration of studies and analysis plans

Preregistration of studies and specific hypotheses can be a useful tool for making strong theoretical claims. Likewise, preregistration of analysis plans can be useful for distinguishing confirmatory and exploratory analyses. We encourage investigators to preregister their studies and analysis plans prior to conducting the research via a publicly accessible registry system (e.g., OSF, ClinicalTrials.gov, or other trial registries in the WHO Registry Network).

There are many available templates; for example, APA, the British Psychological Society, and the German Psychological Society partnered with the Leibniz Institute for Psychology and Center for Open Science to create Preregistration Standards for Quantitative Research in Psychology (Bosnjak et al., 2022).

Articles must state whether or not any work was preregistered and, if so, where to access the preregistration. Preregistrations must be available to reviewers; authors may submit a masked copy via stable link or supplemental material. Links in the method section should be replaced with an identifiable copy on acceptance. For example:

• This study’s design was preregistered; see [STABLE LINK OR DOI].
• This study’s design and hypotheses were preregistered; see [STABLE LINK OR DOI].
• This study’s analysis plan was preregistered; see [STABLE LINK OR DOI].
• This study was not preregistered.

Permissions

Authors of accepted papers must obtain and provide to the editor on final acceptance all necessary permissions to reproduce in print and electronic form any copyrighted work, including test materials (or portions thereof), photographs, and other graphic images (including those used as stimuli in experiments).

On advice of counsel, APA may decline to publish any image whose copyright status is unknown.

• Download Permissions Alert Form (PDF, 13KB)

Publication policies

For full details on publication policies, including use of Artificial Intelligence tools, please see APA Publishing Policies.

APA policy prohibits an author from submitting the same manuscript for concurrent consideration by two or more publications.

See also APA Journals^® Internet Posting Guidelines.

APA requires authors to reveal any possible conflict of interest in the conduct and reporting of research (e.g., financial interests in a test or procedure, funding by pharmaceutical companies for drug research).

• Download Full Disclosure of Interests Form (PDF, 41KB)

In light of changing patterns of scientific knowledge dissemination, APA requires authors to provide information on prior dissemination of the data and narrative interpretations of the data/research appearing in the manuscript (e.g., if some or all were presented at a conference or meeting, posted on a listserv, shared on a website, including academic social networks like ResearchGate, etc.). This information (2–4 sentences) must be provided as part of the Author Note.

Ethical Principles

It is a violation of APA Ethical Principles to publish "as original data, data that have been previously published" (Standard 8.13).

In addition, APA Ethical Principles specify that "after research results are published, psychologists do not withhold the data on which their conclusions are based from other competent professionals who seek to verify the substantive claims through reanalysis and who intend to use such data only for that purpose, provided that the confidentiality of the participants can be protected and unless legal rights concerning proprietary data preclude their release" (Standard 8.14).

APA expects authors to adhere to these standards. Specifically, APA expects authors to have their data available throughout the editorial review process and for at least 5 years after the date of publication.

Authors are required to state in writing that they have complied with APA ethical standards in the treatment of their sample, human or animal, or to describe the details of treatment.

Please include in the Author Note information regarding your research ethics committee approval (i.e., institution granting approval, study name, or study #).

• Download Certification of Compliance With APA Ethical Principles Form (PDF, 26KB)

The APA Ethics Office provides the full Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct electronically on its website in HTML, PDF, and Word format. You may also request a copy by emailing or calling the APA Ethics Office (202-336-5930). You may also read "Ethical Principles," December 1992, American Psychologist, Vol. 47, pp. 1597–1611.

Other information

See APA’s Publishing Policies page for more information on publication policies, including information on author contributorship and responsibilities of authors, author name changes after publication, the use of generative artificial intelligence, funder information and conflict-of-interest disclosures, duplicate publication, data publication and reuse, and preprints.

Visit the Journals Publishing Resource Center for more resources for writing, reviewing, and editing articles for publishing in APA journals.

Editor-in-chief

Aidan G. C. Wright, PhD
University of Michigan, United States

Associate editors

Arielle Baskin-Sommers, PhD
Yale University, United States

Tina Boisseau, PhD
Northwestern University, United States

Miriam Forbes, PhD
Macquarie University, Australia

Daniel Fulford, PhD
Boston University, United States

Dylan Gee, PhD
Yale University, United States

Christopher Hopwood, PhD
University of Zurich, Switzerland

Richard Liu, PhD
Harvard University, Massachusetts General Hospital, United States

Vijay Mittal, PhD
Northwestern University, United States

Sarah Pedersen, PhD
University of Pittsburgh, United States

Alexander Shackman, PhD
University of Maryland, United States

Renee Thompson, PhD
Washington University of St. Louis, United States

Sylia Wilson, PhD
University of Minnesota, United States

Editorial fellows

Lucybel Mendez, PhD
University of Tennessee, United States

Jessica Hua, PhD
University of California San Francisco, San Francisco VA Health System, United States

Thomas Le, PhD
Bryn Mawr College, United States

Editorial board reviewers

Samuel Abplanalp, PhD
University of California Los Angeles, United States

Lauren Alloy, PhD
Temple University, United States

Lisa Anderson, PhD
University of Minnesota, United States

Deidre Anglin, PhD
The City College of New York, United States

Randy Auerbach, PhD
Columbia University, United States

Devin Banks, PhD
University of Missouri, St. Louis, United States

Deanna Barch, PhD
Washington University, Saint Louis, United States

Howard Berenbaum, PhD
University of Illinois, Urbana–Champaign, United States

Jessica Bernard, PhD
Texas A&M University, United States

Katja Bertsch, PhD
Ludwig-Maximillians University, München, Germany

Lindsay P. Bodell, PhD
Western University, Canada

Inti A. Brazil, PhD
Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Nijmegen, Netherlands

Grace Brennan, PhD
Duke University, United States

Jeffrey Burke, PhD
University of Connecticut, United States

Lauren Bylsma
University of Pittsburgh, United States

Christine B. Cha, PhD
Columbia University, United States

Alex Cohen, PhD
Louisiana State University, United States

Craig R. Colder, PhD
State University of New York, Buffalo, United States

David Cole, PhD
Vanderbilt University, United States

Christine Conelea, PhD
University of Minnesota, United States

Christopher Conway, PhD
College of William & Mary, United States

Kristen Culbert, PhD
University of Nevada, Las Vegas, United States

Adam Culbreth, PhD
University of Maryland School of Medicine, United States

John Curtin, PhD
University of Wisconsin–Madison, United States

Melissa Cyders, PhD
Indiana University, United States

Jonas Dora, PhD
University of Washington, Seattle, United States

Shaun M. Eack , PhD
University of Pittsburgh, United States

Ulrich Ebner-Priemer
Karlsruher Institut for Technology, Germany

Molly Erickson, PhD
University of Chicago, United States

Jonas Everaert, PhD
Tilburg University, Netherlands

Angela Fang, PhD
University of Washington, United States

Luis E. Flores, Jr., PhD
Queen’s University, Canada

Jay Fournier, PhD
Ohio State University, United States

Kathryn Fox, PhD
University of Denver, United States

Brandon Gibb, PhD
State University of New York, Binghamton, United States

Jeffrey Girard, PhD
University of Kansas, United States

Catherine Glenn, PhD
Old Dominion University, United States

Diane Carol Gooding, PhD
University of Wisconsin, Madison, United States

Stephanie Gorka, PhD
Ohio State University, United States

Natalie Goulter, PhD
Simon Fraser University, Canada

Eileen Graham, PhD
Northwestern University, United States

Ashley Greene, PhD
James J. Peters Veterans Affairs Medical Center, United States

Jessica Hamilton, PhD
Boston University, United States

Benjamin L. Hankin, PhD
University of Illinois, Urbana–Champaign, United States

Aaron Heller, PhD
University of Miami, United States

Tiffany Ho, PhD
University of California Los Angeles, United States

Andrea L. Howard, PhD
Carleton University, Canada

Juyoen Hur, PhD
Yonsei University, Korea

Luke Hyde, PhD
University of Michigan, United States

Sheri Johnson, PhD
University of California, Berkeley, United States

Neil Jones, PhD
University of Pittsburgh, United States

Keanan Joyner, PhD
University of California, Berkeley

Evan Kleiman, PhD
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, United States

Kelly Klump, PhD
Michigan State University, United States

Autumn Kujawa, PhD
Vanderbilt University, United States

Thomas Kwapil, PhD
University of Illinois, Urbana–Champaign, United States

Jason M. Lavender, PhD
University of California, San Diego, United States

Junghee Lee, PhD
University of California, Los Angeles, United States

Steve S. Lee, PhD
University of California, Los Angeles, United States

Joelle LeMoult, PhD
University of British Columbia, United States

Holly Levin-Aspenson, PhD
University of North Texas, United States

James Li, PhD
University of Wisconsin–Madison, United States

Sarah Hope Lincoln, PhD
Case Western Reserve University, United States

Andrew K. Littlefield
Texas Tech University, United States

Kristian Markon, PhD
University of Minnesota, United States

R. Kathryn McHugh, PhD
McLean Hospital and Harvard Medical School, United States

Ethan Mereish, PhD
University of Maryland, United States

Gregory A. Miller, PhD
University of California, Los Angeles, United States

Joshua D. Miller, PhD
University of Georgia, United States

Kyle S. Minor, PhD
Indiana University — Purdue University Indianapolis, United States

Aprajita Mohanty, PhD
State University of New York, Stony Brook, United States

Brooke Molina, PhD
State University of New York, Stony Brook, United States

Scott Monroe, PhD
University of Notre Dame, United States

Erin Moran, PhD
Washington University of St. Louis, United States

Judith K. Morgan, PhD
University of Pittsburgh, United States

Kristin Naragon-Gainey, PhD
State University of New York, Buffalo, United States

Erick Nook, PhD
Princeton University, United States

Derek Novacek, PhD
Veterans Affairs Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System and University of California Los Angeles, United States

Bunmi Olatunji, PhD
Vanderbilt University, United States

Thomas Olino, PhD
Temple University, United States

David Pagliaccio, PhD
New York State Psychiatric Institute and Columbia University, United States

Daniel Pine, PhD
National Institute of Mental Health, United States

Amy Pinkham, PhD
University of Texas at Dallas, United States

Sarah Racine, PhD
McGill University, Canada

Gianna Rea-Sandin, PhD
University of Minnesota

Rachel F. Rodgers, PhD, FAED
APPEAR, Northeastern University, United States

Craig Rodriguez-Seijas, PhD
University of Michigan, United States

Johnathan Rottenberg, PhD
University of South Florida, United States

Ayelet Meron Ruscio, PhD
University of Pennsylvania, United States

Naomi Sadeh, PhD
University of Delaware, United States

Douglas Samuel, PhD
Purdue University, United States

Michael Sayette, PhD
University of Pittsburgh, United States

Suzanne Schallhorn, PhD
University of North Carolina at Greensboro, United States

Casey Schofield, PhD
Skidmore College, United States

Edward Selby, PhD
Rutgers University, United States

Martin Sellbom, PhD
University of Otago, New Zealand

Stewart Shankman, PhD
Northwestern University, United States

Kenneth Sher, PhD
University of Missouri & MARC, United States

Kathryn Smith, PhD
University of Southern California, United States

Sarah Sperry, PhD
University of Michigan, United States

Kasey Stanton, PhD
University of Wyoming, United States

Lisa R. Starr, PhD
University of Rochester, United States

Gregory Strauss, PhD
University of Georgia, United States

Ben Tabak, PhD
Irvine, CA, United States

Katharine Thakkar, PhD
Michigan State University, United States

Michael Treadway, PhD
Emory University, United States

Hayley Treloar Padovano, PhD
Brown University, United States

Elisa Trucco, PhD
Florida International University, United States

David Watson, PhD
University of Notre Dame, United States

Ashley L. Watts, PhD
University of Missouri, United States

Anna Weinberg, PhD
McGill University, United States

Lauren Weinstock, PhD
Brown University, United States

Diane L. Williams, PhD
Penn State University, United States

Stephen J. Wilson, PhD
Pennsylvania State University, United States

Katie Witkiewitz, PhD
University of New Mexico, United States

Erika Wolf, PhD
National Center for PTSD & Boston University, United States

Shirley Yen, PhD
Harvard Medical School, United States

K. Lira Yoon, PhD
University of Notre Dame, United States

Peer review coordinator

Lindsay MacMurray, MSW

Abstracting and indexing services providing coverage of Journal of Psychopathology and Clinical Science

• Academic OneFile
• Academic Search Alumni Edition
• Academic Search Complete
• Academic Search Elite
• Academic Search Index
• Academic Search Premier
• Advanced Placement Psychology Collection
• ASSIA: Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts
• Biological Abstracts
• BIOSIS Previews
• Cabell’s Directory of Publishing Opportunities in Psychology
• CINAHL Complete
• CINAHL Plus
• Criminal Justice Abstracts
• Criminal Justice Abstracts with Full Text
• Current Abstracts
• Current Contents: Social & Behavioral Sciences
• EBSCO MegaFILE
• Educational Research Abstracts Online
• Embase (Excerpta Medica)
• ERIH (European Reference Index for the Humanities and Social Sciences)
• Expanded Academic ASAP
• General OneFile
• Health & Wellness Resource Center and Alternative Health Module
• Health Reference Center Academic
• Humanities and Social Sciences Index Retrospective
• Humanities Index Retrospective
• InfoTrac Custom
• Journal Citations Report: Social Sciences Edition
• MEDLINE
• MLA International Bibliography
• NEJM Journal Watch Psychiatry
• NSA Collection
• Nursing and Allied Health Collection
• Nursing Resource Center
• OCLC
• OmniFile Full Text Mega
• Professional ProQuest Central
• ProQuest Central
• ProQuest Criminal Justice
• ProQuest Discovery
• ProQuest Platinum Periodicals
• ProQuest Psychology Journals
• ProQuest Public Health
• ProQuest Research Library
• ProQuest Social Science Journals
• Psychology Collection
• PsycInfo
• PsycLine
• SafetyLit
• SCOPUS
• Social Sciences Abstracts
• Social Sciences Citation Index
• Social Sciences Full Text
• Social Sciences Index Retrospective
• Social Work Abstracts
• Studies on Women and Gender Abstracts
• TOC Premier
• Women's Studies International

Transparency and Openness Promotion

APA endorses the Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) Guidelines by a community working group in conjunction with the Center for Open Science (Nosek et al. 2015). The TOP Guidelines cover eight fundamental aspects of research planning and reporting that can be followed by journals and authors at three levels of compliance. For example:

• Level 1: Disclosure—The article must disclose whether or not the materials are posted to a trusted repository.
• Level 2: Requirement—The article must share materials via a trusted repository when legally and ethically permitted (or disclose the legal and/or ethical restriction when not permitted).
• Level 3: Verification—A third party must verify that the standard is met.

At a minimum, empirical research, including meta-analyses, submitted to the Journal of Psychopathology and Clinical Science must meet Level 2 (“requirement”) for all eight aspects of research planning and reporting. The journal is also adhering to Level 3 (“verification”) for replication. Authors should include a subsection in their methods description titled “Transparency and openness.” This subsection should detail the efforts the authors have made to comply with the TOP guidelines.

The table below summarizes the minimal TOP requirements of the journal; please refer to the TOP guidelines for details, and contact the editor (Aidan Wright, PhD) with any further questions. We recommend sharing data, materials, and code via trusted repositories (e.g., APA’s repository on the Open Science Framework (OSF)). Trusted repositories adhere to policies that make data discoverable, accessible, usable, and preserved for the long term. Trusted repositories also assign unique and persistent identifiers.

We encourage investigators to preregister their studies and to share protocols and analysis plans prior to conducting their research. There are many available preregistration forms (e.g., the APA Preregistration for Quantitative Research in Psychology template, ClinicalTrials.gov, or other preregistration templates available via OSF); completed preregistration forms should be posted on a publicly accessible registry system (e.g., OSF, ClinicalTrials.gov, or other trial registries in the WHO Registry Network).

Investigators are encouraged to post a pre-print of their submitted work on a pre-print server (e.g., PsyArXiv, medRxiv, bioRxiv, ArXiv).

The following list presents the eight fundamental aspects of research planning and reporting, the TOP level required by the Journal of Psychopathology and Clinical Science, and a brief description of the journal’s policy.

• Citation: Level 2, Requirement—All data, program code, and other methods developed by others must be cited in the text and listed in the references section. This includes individual packages in R.
• Data Transparency: Level 2, Requirement—The raw and/or processed data on which study conclusions are based are posted to a trusted repository and how to access them. If the data cannot be made available, the article states the legal or ethical reasons why they are not available. Please note that stating, “Data will be made available upon request,” is not sufficient for satisfying this requirement. Investigators are welcome to include a statement to that effect, but the manuscript must also state first that the “Data are not open or freely available,” along with an explanation why the data must remain closed.
• Analytic Methods (Code) Transparency: Level 2, Requirement—Statistical software code needed to reproduce analyses in an article is posted to a trusted repository. Exceptions must be identified at article submission, and deviations from this policy will be exceedingly rare.
• Research Materials Transparency: Level 2, Requirement—Materials described in the method section are posted to a trusted repository along with a link to access them. If they cannot be made available, the article states the legal or ethical reasons why they are not available.
• Design and Analysis Transparency (Reporting Standards) : Level 2, Requirement—Article must comply with APA Style Journal Article Reporting Standards (JARS).
• Study Preregistration: Level 2, Requirement—Article states whether the study design and (if applicable) hypotheses of any of the work reported was preregistered and, if so, how to access it. Authors must submit a masked copy via stable link or supplemental material.
• Analysis Plan Preregistration: Level 2, Requirement—Article states whether any of the work reported preregistered an analysis plan and, if so, how to access it.  Authors must submit a masked copy via stable link or supplemental material.
• Replication: Level 3, Verification—The journal publishes replications and Registered Reports.

Investigators new to open science practices may find it useful to consult resources on implementing them, like APA’s or Getting Started on the Open Science Framework.

If there questions about how to meet these standards or whether something does or does not meet the standards, investigators should feel welcome to email the Editor, Aidan Wright, PhD.

Journal equity, diversity, and inclusion statement

The mission of the Journal of Psychopathology and Clinical Science is to increase our fundamental understanding of psychopathology. This can only be achieved through diverse and inclusive representation of who is conducting and interpreting the science, who is enrolled as participants in the research, where it is conducted, and who is evaluating that work for publication in the Journal. In all these areas, we welcome and are committed to seeking broad and diverse representation of age, culture, socioeconomic background, sex, gender, race/ethnicity, national origin, and sexual orientation. The science of psychopathology must be for everyone, and we believe its successful advancement depends on more diverse and inclusive representation in the populations that contribute to them. Regardless of your identity we value your contributions and are especially eager to receive contributions from traditionally underrepresented perspectives to increase the generalizability or identify context specificity of what we know about psychopathology.

Inclusive study designs

• Collaborative research models
• Diverse samples
• Registered Reports

Definitions and further details on inclusive study designs are available on the Journals EDI homepage.

Inclusive reporting standards

• Bias-free language and community-driven language guidelines (required)
• Author contribution roles using CRediT (required)
• Data sharing and data availability statements (required)
• Impact statements (required)
• Year(s) of data collection (recommended)
• Participant sample descriptions (required)
• Sample justifications (required)
• Constraints on Generality (COG) statements (recommended)

More information on this journal’s reporting standards is listed under the submission guidelines tab.

Pathways to authorship and editorship

Editorial fellowships

Editorial fellowships help early-career psychologists gain firsthand experience in scholarly publishing and editorial leadership roles. This journal offers an editorial fellowship program for early-career psychologists from historically excluded communities.

Other EDI offerings

ORCID reviewer recognition

Open Research and Contributor ID (ORCID) Reviewer Recognition provides a visible and verifiable way for journals to publicly credit reviewers without compromising the confidentiality of the peer-review process. This journal has implemented the ORCID Reviewer Recognition feature in Editorial Manager, meaning that reviewers can be recognized for their contributions to the peer-review process.

Masked peer review

This journal offers masked peer review (where both the authors’ and reviewers’ identities are not known to the other). Research has shown that masked peer review can help reduce implicit bias against traditionally female names or early-career scientists with smaller publication records (Budden et al., 2008; Darling, 2015).

Journal name change

• From Journal of Abnormal Psychology^® to Journal of Psychopathology and Clinical Science (beginning in 2022)

Announcements

• Call for editorial fellow nominations
• Press mentions
• Upcoming special sections
• Award-winning articles

Editor Spotlight

• Read an interview with Editor Aidan G. C. Wright, PhD
• Read an interview with Editor Angus MacDonald, PhD

From APA Journals Article Spotlight^®

• Toward Validation of a Structural Approach to Conceptualizing Psychopathology: A Special Section
• The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP): A New Model That Addresses Limitations of Traditional Taxonomies
• Increasing Replicability, Transparency, and Openness in Clinical Psychological Research