Psychological Assessment

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 Julie A. Suhr, please submit manuscripts electronically through the Manuscript Submission Portal in Microsoft Word Format (.doc or .docx), or LaTex (.tex) as a zip file with an accompanied Portable Document Format (.pdf) of the manuscript file.

Submit Manuscript

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

Psychological Assessment 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 review

This journal has adopted a masked review policy for all submissions. Authors should make every effort to ensure that the manuscript itself contains no clues to their identities, including grant numbers, names of institutions providing IRB approval, self-citations, and links to online repositories for data, materials, code, or preregistrations (e.g., Create a View-only Link for a Project). Authors' names and affiliations should not appear in the manuscript. Instead, please include this information in the separate title page file.

Please ensure that the final version for production includes a byline and full author note for typesetting.

Manuscript preparation

In general, manuscripts should be no longer than 40 pages (this includes all elements of the manuscript, with the exception of any supplemental material).

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). APA Style and Grammar Guidelines for the 7th edition are available.

Review APA's Journal Manuscript Preparation Guidelines before submitting your article.

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.

Manuscripts concerned with the development of a new assessment instrument should include a copy of the instrument.

Reporting on sample of study and Constraints on Generality

All empirical manuscripts should report on sex and gender, and race and ethnicity of the included samples in both the abstract and the discussion section of the manuscript. If available, information on SES should also be reported.

Authors are also encouraged to 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).

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), explicitly stating limitations of the sample in regard to diversity factors and directly noting that study findings may not generalize to the broader population, if the sample was not sufficiently diverse.

Further, the examination of sex/gender, race, and ethnicity should not be reified as a biological factor, and authors should incorporate and explicitly discuss how race and ethnicity may be proxy measures for systemic racism, as well as cultural, social, environmental, economic, and structural factors. For more information, please refer to the standards for publishing on racial health inequalities (Boyd, Lindo, Weeks, & McLemore, 2020).

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.

Public significance statements

Psychological Assessment publishes public significance statements in addition to regular abstracts. This new feature provides authors an opportunity to communicate their findings to general audiences who access online content.

The public significance statement should be 1–2 sentences (30-70 words) written in plain English for the educated public. The text should summarize the article's findings and why they are important. Please refer to Guidance for Translational Abstracts and Public Significance Statements to help you write your statement.

Your public significance statement should be placed below the abstract in the manuscript file you upload during the submission process.

Author contributions statements using CRediT

The APA Publication Manual (7th ed.) 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, Psychological Assessment 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 this 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 reuse.
• 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.

Journal Article Reporting Standards

Authors should review 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 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 researcher's own perspective affected the study, as well as the contexts in which the research and analysis took place.

Transparency and openness

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.

Empirical research, including meta-analyses, submitted to Psychological Assessment must, at a minimum, meet Level 1 (Disclosure) for all eight aspects of research planning and reporting. 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.

However, we strongly recommend that authors consider sharing relevant materials (such as coding used, de-identified data) in a trusted repository, especially as this may aid reviewers in completing reviews of the submissions.

The list below summarizes the minimal TOP requirements of the journal. Please refer to the Center for Open Science TOP guidelines for details, and contact the editor (Julie A. Suhr) with any further questions. We strongly recommend that authors consider sharing relevant materials (such as coding used, deidentified data) in a trusted repository (e.g., APA’s repository on the Open Science Framework (OSF)), especially as this may aid reviewers in completing reviews of the submissions. 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 analysis plans prior to conducting their research. There are many available preregistration forms (e.g., the APA Preregistration for Quantitative Research in Psychology template, ClininalTrials.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).

The following list presents the eight fundamental aspects of research planning and reporting, the TOP level required by Psychological Assessment, and a brief description of the journal's policy.

• Citation: Level 1, Disclosure—All data, program code, and other methods developed by others should be cited in the text and listed in the references section.
• Data Transparency: Level 1, Disclosure—Article states whether the raw and/or processed data on which study conclusions are based are posted to a trusted repository and, if so, how to access them.
• Analytic Methods (Code) Transparency: Level 1, Disclosure—Article states whether computer code or syntax needed to reproduce analyses in an article is posted to a trusted repository and, if so, how to access it.
• Research Materials Transparency: Level 1, Disclosure—Article states whether materials described in the method section are posted to a trusted repository and, if so, how to access them.
• Design and Analysis Transparency (Reporting Standards): Level 1, Disclosure—The journal strongly encourages the use of APA Style Journal Article Reporting Standards ([JARS-Quant, JARS-Qual, and/or MARS]). The journal encourages the use of the 21-word statement, reporting a) how the sample size was determined, 2) all data exclusions, 3) all manipulations, and 4) all study measures. See Simmons, Nelson, & Simonsohn (2012) for details.
• Study Preregistration: Level 1, Disclosure—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 may submit a masked copy via stable link or supplemental material or may provide a link after acceptance.
• Analysis Plan Preregistration: Level 1, Disclosure—Article states whether any of the work reported preregistered an analysis plan and, if so, where to access it. Authors may submit a masked copy via stable link or supplemental material or may provide a link after acceptance.
• Replication: Level 1, Disclosure—The journal publishes replications.

Data, materials, and code

Authors must state whether data, code, and study materials are posted to a trusted repository and, if so, how to access them. Recommended repositories include APA’s repository on the Open Science Framework (OSF), or authors can access a full list of other recommended repositories.

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. For submissions with quantitative or simulation analytic methods, state whether the study analysis code is available, and, if so, where to access it. 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.

For example:

• All data have been made publicly available at the [trusted repository name] and can be accessed at [persistent URL or DOI].
• Materials and analysis code for this study are available by emailing the corresponding author.
• Materials and analysis code for this study are not available.
• 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. If any aspect of the study is preregistered, include the registry link in the method section.

For example:

• This study’s design was preregistered prospectively, before data were collected; see [STABLE LINK OR DOI].
• This study’s design and hypotheses were preregistered after data had been collected but before analyses were undertaken; see [STABLE LINK OR DOI].
• This study’s analysis plan was preregistered; see [STABLE LINK OR DOI].
• This study was not preregistered.

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.

LaTex files

LaTex files (.tex) should be uploaded with all other files such as BibTeX Generated Bibliography File (.bbl) or Bibliography Document (.bib) together in a compressed ZIP file folder for the manuscript submission process. In addition, a Portable Document Format (.pdf) of the manuscript file must be uploaded for the peer-review process.

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

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

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

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

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)

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. There should not be overlap between material submitted to a data repository and material submitted as supplemental material. Supplemental material can include items such as additional analyses, tables, or figures, whereas a data repository is best suited for things like code, materials, and data sets.

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.

Brief Reports

Psychological Assessment will review brief reports of research studies in clinical assessment. The procedure is intended to permit the publication of carefully designed studies with a narrow focus or of specialized interest.

An author who submits a brief report must agree not to submit the full report to another journal of general circulation. The brief report should give a clear, condensed summary of the procedure of the study and as full an account of the results as space permits.

The brief report should be limited to 20 manuscript pages (1” margins, size 12 font). This includes the title page, abstract, author note, text, reference list, and any footnotes, tables, and figures. The number of tables and figures should be limited.

The author is encouraged to limit the number of headings within the brief report and to combine headings whenever possible. For example, the results and discussion sections can be combined. Also, subheadings under the method section can often be omitted.

Authors are encouraged but not required to have available an extended report. If one is available, the author note of the brief report should include the following statement:

• Correspondence concerning this article (and requests for an extended report of this study) should be addressed to [give the author's full name and address].

Replications

Psychological Assessment publishes direct replications. Submissions should include “A Replication of XX Study” in the subtitle of the manuscript as well as in the abstract.

Research on translations of tests

Psychological Assessment rarely publishes in print psychometric studies of translations of tests unless the papers also address some conceptual or methodological issue of broader interest to clinical assessment.

However, there is a special online-only publishing option for such research on translations of tests articles. With this option, manuscripts undergo our normal review process and are held to the same standards of review as all other submissions to the journal, but, if accepted, they would not appear in the print version of the journal but rather online only.

Studies appropriate for this option must have a focus consistent with the editorial scope of the journal, which emphasizes clinical assessment research.

These articles would be listed in all tables of contents (online and print) and would be clearly identified as published "online only". Also, full-text copies of the translated tests would go into PsycTests.

Translations of commercially published tests are not eligible for review in this category because, in addition to copyright constraints, such translations are not consistent with the goals of our research on translations of tests program or PsycTests. Translations of single scales also are not eligible.

Authors wishing to submit manuscripts in this category should select the "Research on Translations of Tests" article type when submitting their manuscript. Additional documents are required upon submission. Please follow the below guidelines.

If your manuscript involves a new translation (i.e., developed by you and previously unpublished):

1. Review Information For Authors of Translated Tests (PDF, 108KB). This document is for informational purposes only and does not need to be submitted.
2. Submit the Permission Form for Translated Tests (PDF, 31KB), to be completed by the copyright owner of the original test.
3. Submit the PsycTests Author Agreement for Translations (PDF, 56KB), to be completed by the translation test author.
4. Submit a copy of the translated test as supplemental material.

If your manuscript involves a previously published, existing translation:

• Access the APA Permissions Alert Form (PDF, 13KB).
• List the previously published translation on that form.
• Obtain a permission letter from the copyright holder. The copyright holder may be an individual but often is a publisher. The permission letter you obtain must grant permission (a) to reproduce the material in "both print and electronic formats" and (b) for the translated test to be deposited into PsycTests.
• Have the copyright owner of the translated test complete the PsycTests Agreement (PDF, 34KB)
• Submit a copy of the translated test as supplemental material.

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.

Preprint policy: Articles available on a preprint server generally are permissible, as long as the journal editor deems the article to be novel enough or to have received minimal attention. This is judged on a case-by-case basis.

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.

• 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

Julie A. Suhr, PhD
Ohio University, United States

Associate editors

Jaime L. Anderson, PhD
Sam Houston State University, United States

Angel Blanch, PhD
University of Lleida, Spain

C. Emily Durbin, PhD
Michigan State University, United States

Mauricio A. Garcia-Barrera, PhD
University of Victoria, Canada

Elizabeth P. Hayden, PhD
University of Western Ontario, Canada

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

Ryan J. Marek, PhD
Sam Houston State University, United States

Kristin Naragon-Gainey, PhD
University of Western Australia, Australia

Augustine Osman, PhD
The University of Texas at San Antonio, United States

Kasey Stanton, PhD
University of Wyoming, United States

Javier Suárez-Álvarez, Ph.D.
University of Massachusetts Amherst, United States

Kevin D. Wu, PhD
Northern Illinois University, United States

Consulting editors

Robert A. Ackerman, PhD
The University of Texas at Dallas, United States

Joye C. Anestis, PhD
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, United States

Rebecca P. Ang, PhD
National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore

Ioannis Angelakis, PhD, CPsychol
University of Liverpool, United Kingdom

Paul A. Arbisi, PhD
Minneapolis VA Health Care Center, United States

Lindsay E. Ayearst, PhD
Toronto, ON, Canada

Bo Bach, PhD
Slagelse Psykiatrisk Hospital, Psykiatrisk Forskningsenhed, Denmark

R. Michael Bagby, PhD
University of Toronto, Canada

Joseph R. Bardeen, PhD
Northern Illinois University, United States

C. Albert Bardi, PhD
University of the South, United States

Stephen D. Benning, PhD
University of Nevada, Las Vegas, United States

Yossef S. Ben-Porath, PhD
Kent State University, United States

Nicholas F. Benson, PhD
Baylor University, United States

Lindsay P. Bodell, PhD
Western University, Canada

Kelsey A. Bonfils, PhD
University of Southern Mississippi, United States

Kimberly P. Brown, PhD, ABPP
Vanderbilt University Medical Center, United States

Sara J. Bufferd, PhD
University of Louisville, United States

William R. Calabrese, PhD
Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, United States

Ryan W. Carpenter, PhD
University of Notre Dame, United States

Antonio Cepeda-Benito, PhD
University of Vermont, United States

Heining Cham, PhD
Fordham University, United States

David C. Cicero, PhD
University of North Texas, United States

Joshua D. Clapp, PhD
University of Wyoming, United States

Betsy Davis, PhD
Oregon Research Institute, United States

Andres De Los Reyes, PhD
University of Maryland at College Park, United States

David DeMatteo, PhD, JD
Drexel University, United States

Jacobus Donders, PhD
Mary Free Bed Rehabilitation Hospital, United States

Michael C. Edwards, PhD
Arizona State University, United States

Rachel M. Fenning, PhD
California State University, Fullerton, United States

Thomas A. Fergus, PhD
Baylor University, United States

Johnathan D. Forbey, PhD
Ball State University, United States

K. Jean Forney, PhD
Ohio University, United States

Andrea Fossati, PhD
Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Italy

Howard N. Garb, PhD
Joint Base San Antonio – Lackland, United States

Sarah L. Garcia, PhD
Stetson University, United States

Carlo Garofalo, PhD
University of Perugia, Italy

Cory J. Gerritsen, PhD, CPsych
Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Canada

Luciano Giromini, PhD
University of Turin, Italy

Thomas Grisso, PhD
University of Massachusetts Medical School, United States

Kyunghee Han, PhD
Central Michigan University, United States

Richard W. Handel, PhD
Old Dominion University, United States

Stephen D. Hart, PhD
Simon Fraser University, Canada

Stephen N. Haynes, PhD
University of Hawaii, United States

James B. Hoelzle, PhD
Marquette University, United States

James A. Holdnack, PhD
Bowie, MD, United States

Marco Innamorati, PhD, PsyD
European University of Rome, Italy

Sharon Rae Jenkins, PhD
University of North Texas, United States

Justin E. Karr, PhD
University of Kentucky, United States

Shannon E. Kelley, PhD
William James College, United States

Gail A. Kerver, PhD
Sanford Research, United States

Yuliya Kotelnikova, PhD
University of Alberta, Canada

Radhika Krishnamurthy, PsyD
Florida Tech, United States

Daryl G. Kroner, PhD
Southern Illinois University Carbondale, United States

Charles E. Lance, PhD
University of the Western Cape, South Africa

Jonas W. B. Lang, PhD
Ghent University, Belgium

Chung-Ying Lin, PhD
National Cheng Kung University, Taiwan

Pan Liu, PhD
Western University, Canada

Sarah J. Macoun, PhD
University of Victoria, Canada

David K. Marcus, PhD
Washington State University, United States

Kristian E. Markon, PhD
University of Iowa, United States

Craig Marquardt, PhD
Minneapolis VA Health Care System, United States

Christina G. McDonnell, PhD
University of Wyoming, United States

Ryan J. McGill, PhD
College of William & Mary, United States

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

Karen S. Mitchell, PhD
National Center for PTSD at VA Boston Healthcare System and Boston University School of Medicine, United States

Andreas Mokros, PhD
University of Hagen, Germany

Michael Moore, PhD
Adelphi University, United States

Emily Murriel, PhD
Johns Hopkins Medicine, United States

Adam P. Natoli, PhD
Sam Houston State University, United States

Brian P. O'Connor, PhD
University of British Columbia, Okanagan, Canada

Thomas M. Olino, PhD
Temple University, United States

Joshua R. Oltmanns, PhD
Washington University in St. Louis, United States

Theone S. E. Paterson, PhD, R.Psych.
University of Victoria, Canada

Isaac T. Petersen, PhD
University of Iowa, United States

Jeremy W. Pettit, PhD
Florida International University, United States

Aaron L. Pincus, PhD
Pennsylvania State University, United States

Antonio Preti, MD
University of Cagliari, Italy

Antonio E. Puente, PhD
University of North Carolina Wilmington, United States

Lena C. Quilty, PhD
Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Canada

Cecil R. Reynolds, PhD
Texas A&M University, United States

Michael J. Roche, PhD
West Chester University of Pennsylvania, United States

Thomas L. Rodebaugh, PhD
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, United States

Jonathan D. Rubright, PhD
National Board of Medical Examiners, United States

Jared R. Ruchensky, PhD
Sam Houston State University, United States

Anthony C. Ruocco, PhD, CPsych
University of Toronto, Canada

Manuel Sanchez-Garcia, PhD
University of Huelva, Spain

Colleen C. Schreyer, PhD
Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, United States

Martin Sellbom, PhD
University of Otago, New Zealand

Leonard J. Simms, PhD
University at Buffalo, The State University of New York, United States

Reid L. Skeel, PhD
Central Michigan University, United States

David A. Smith, PhD
University of Notre Dame, United States

Beth A. Springate, PhD
University of Connecticut Health Center, United States

Sara M. Stasik-O'Brien, PhD
Carthage College, United States

Yana Suchy, PhD
University of Utah, United States

Anthony M. Tarescavage, PhD
John Carroll University, United States

Hedwig Teglasi, PhD
University of Maryland, College Park, United States

Michael L. Thomas, PhD
Colorado State University, United States

Paul F. Tremblay, PhD
Western University, Canada

Paula Vagos, PhD
Universidade de Aveiro, Portugal

Anna R. Van Meter, PhD
Yeshiva University/The Feinstein Institute for Medical Research, United States

Wei Wang, PhD
Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway

Xinghua Wang, PhD
Nanyang Technological University, Singapore

David Watson, PhD
University of Notre Dame, United States

Frank W. Weathers, PhD
Auburn University, United States

Nathan Charles Weed, PhD
Central Michigan University, United States

James P. Whelan, PhD
University of Memphis, United States

Thomas A. Widiger, PhD
University of Kentucky, United States

Trevor Williams, PhD
Kent State University, United States

Sylia Wilson, PhD
University of Minnesota, United States

Theresa A. Wozencraft, PhD
University of Louisiana at Lafayette, United States

Wenhui Yang, PhD
Hunan Normal University, China

Peer review coordinator

Angela Clinton
American Psychological Association

Abstracting and indexing services providing coverage of Psychological Assessment^®

• Academic OneFile
• Academic Search Alumni Edition
• Academic Search Complete
• Academic Search Elite
• Academic Search Index
• Academic Search Premier
• Advanced Placement Psychology Collection
• Cabell's Directory of Publishing Opportunities in Psychology
• Child Development & Adolescent Studies
• Current Abstracts
• Current Contents: Social & Behavioral Sciences
• EBSCO MegaFILE
• Education Abstracts
• Education Full Text
• Education Research Complete
• Education Source
• Educational Research Abstracts Online
• Educator's Reference Complete
• Embase (Excerpta Medica)
• ERIH (European Reference Index for the Humanities and Social Sciences)
• Expanded Academic ASAP
• Family & Society Studies Worldwide
• General OneFile
• InfoTrac Custom
• Journal Citations Report: Social Sciences Edition
• MEDLINE
• NSA Collection
• OCLC
• OmniFile Full Text Mega
• PASCAL
• Professional ProQuest Central
• ProQuest Central
• ProQuest Discovery
• ProQuest Platinum Periodicals
• ProQuest Psychology Journals
• 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 Work Abstracts
• TOC Premier

• Methodological and Statistical Advancements in Clinical Assessment:

  Special issue of the APA journal Psychological Assessment, Vol. 31, No. 12, December 2019. Includes articles about reliability, item response theory, factor analysis, scale development, construct validity, clinical decision making, multicultural/diversity contexts, response bias, neuroscience, and experience sampling.

• New Approaches to the Measurement of Personality:

  Special issue of the APA journal Psychological Assessment, Vol. 31, No. 4, April 2019. The papers all include new conceptual ideas, new methods, or new data-analytic approaches that should be helpful to personality researchers in the identification of true construct variance.

• Field Reliability and Validity of Forensic Psychological Assessment Instruments and Procedures:

  Special issue of the APA journal Psychological Assessment, Vol. 29, No. 6, June 2017. The studies cover a broad range of forensic mental health assessment topics, settings, populations, and types of instruments.

• Assessment in Health Psychology:

  Special issue of the APA journal Psychological Assessment, Vol. 28, No. 9, September 2016. Includes articles about assessment issues in substance use and abuse; shared decision making, patient-provider communication, and health care quality; self-reports along the age continuum; and measure comparisons/reviews.

• Assessment of Mindfulness and Closely Related Constructs:

  Special issue of the APA journal Psychological Assessment, Vol. 28, No. 7, July 2016. The articles address the need for refinements in self-report methods and the development of more-objective performance-based methods for assessment of mindfulness. Three of the articles expand the understanding of self-report instruments; the other three describe promising laboratory-based tasks.

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.

Empirical research, including meta-analyses, submitted to Psychological Assessment must, at a minimum, meet Level 1 (Disclosure) for all eight aspects of research planning and reporting. 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 Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) guidelines.

The list below summarizes the minimal TOP requirements of the journal. Please refer to the Center for Open Science TOP guidelines for details, and contact the editor (Julie A. Suhr) with any further questions.We strongly recommend that authors consider sharing relevant materials (such as coding used, de-identified data) in a trusted repository (e.g., APA’s repository on the Open Science Framework (OSF)), especially as this may aid reviewers in completing reviews of the submissions. 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 analysis plans prior to conducting their research. There are many available preregistration forms (e.g., the APA Preregistration for Quantitative Research in Psychology template, ClininalTrials.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).

The following list presents the eight fundamental aspects of research planning and reporting, the TOP level required by Psychological Assessment, and a brief description of the journal's policy.

• Citation: Level 1, Disclosure—All data, program code, and other methods developed by others should be cited in the text and listed in the References section.
• Data Transparency: Level 1, Disclosure—Article states whether the raw and/or processed data on which study conclusions are based are posted to a trusted repository and, if so, how to access them.
• Analytic Methods (Code) Transparency: Level 1, Disclosure—Article states whether computer code or syntax needed to reproduce analyses in an article is posted to a trusted repository and, if so, how to access it.
• Research Materials Transparency: Level 1, Disclosure—Article states whether materials described in the Method section are posted to a trusted repository and, if so, how to access them.
• Design and Analysis Transparency (Reporting Standards): Level 1, Disclosure—The journal strongly encourages the use of APA Style Journal Article Reporting Standards ([JARS-Quant, JARS-Qual, and/or MARS]). The journal encourages the use of the 21-word statement, reporting a) how the sample size was determined, 2) all data exclusions, 3) all manipulations, and 4) all study measures. See Simmons, Nelson, & Simonsohn (2012) for details.
• Study Preregistration: Level 1, Disclosure—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 may submit a masked copy via stable link or supplemental material or may provide a link after acceptance.
• Analysis Plan Preregistration: Level 1, Disclosure—Article states whether any of the work reported preregistered an analysis plan and, if so, how to access it. Authors may submit a masked copy via stable link or supplemental material or may provide a link after acceptance.
• Replication: Level 1, Disclosure—The journal publishes replications.

Other open science initiatives

• Open Science badges: Not offered
• Public significance statements: Offered
• Author contribution statements using CRediT: Required
• Registered Reports: Not published
• Replications: Published
• Detailed sample descriptions: Required
• · Constraints on Generality (COG) statements: Required

Explore open science at APA.

Journal equity, diversity, and inclusion statement

Psychological Assessment supports equity, diversity, and inclusion in its practices, in line with the APA Publishing EDI Framework. The journal welcomes submissions that include samples from typically underrepresented and/or historically marginalized groups and encourages submissions that include samples beyond individuals from Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic (WEIRD; Heinrich et al., 2010) societies. The journal also welcomes study designs that address heterogenity within diverse samples, although studies focused exclusively on underrepresented and/or historically marginalized populations are also welcome.

Inclusive study designs

• Diverse samples

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)
• Participant sample descriptions (required)
• Sample justifications (recommended)
• Constraints on Generality (COG) statements (required)

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

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).

Announcement

• Call for editorial fellow nominations
• New editors appointed

Editorial

• Editorial for Psychological Assessment

Editor Spotlight

• Read an interview with Editor Julie A. Suhr, PhD

From APA Journals Article Spotlight^®

• Special issue on the field utility of forensic assessment instruments and procedures
• Assessment of mindfulness and closely related constructs: Special issue of Psychological Assessment