Psychological Association of the Philippines Publication Guidelines

RESEARCH_PAP Publication Guidelines

Fr: pap.org.ph

Types of Articles 

In pursuit of its aims, the PJP will publish various types of articles: (a) regular research reports, (b) brief research reports, (c) theoretical review articles, (d) general articles on psychology in the Philippines, (e) book reviews, and other types of articles that may be invited and/or approved by the Editors.

Regular research reports describe original research papers that describe empirical work that represents a significant addition to psychological knowledge in any of the major areas of psychology science.  Regular research reports should be no more than 8,000 words, and should include an abstract of no more than 200 words and five keywords; the reference list cannot exceed 50 items.

Brief research reports describe original research papers that describe empirical work that either (a) replicates findings previously published in the international research literature, (b) validates theories, hypotheses, methods, and psychological instruments developed in other countries, or (c) presents preliminary or exploratory findings that present innovations in theory, method, or analysis.  Short research reports should be no more than 3,000 words, and should include an abstract of not more than 150 words and five keywords; the reference list cannot exceed 30 items.

Theoretical review articles present either a tutorial, a critical review, and/or a metanalysis of Philippine research on a research problem or research method that relates Philippine research to global research on the same topic.  Theoretical review articles should be no more than 8,000 words, and should include an abstract of not more than 200 words and five keywords; the reference list cannot exceed 50 items.

General articles give perspectives on problem, issues, and/or new developments pertaining to research, teaching, and practice of psychology in the Philippines or to psychology in Philippine society, government, or social problems. General articles should be no more than 6,000 words, and should include an abstract of not more than 150 words and five keywords; the reference list cannot exceed 50 items.

Book reviews provide critical commentaries on psychology books published in the Philippines , books authored or co-authored by Filipino psychologists, or edited books with contributions by Filipino psychologists.  Book reviews should be no more than 2,000 words, and should not include an abstract; the reference list cannot exceed 5 items.

Articles that do not fall under any of the five types described above, but that fit the aims and scope of the PJP may be invited by or proposed to the Editors.

Preparation and Submission of Manuscript

All manuscripts should follow the style of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (6thEdition); all prescriptions regarding the handling of references, tables, figures, headings and subheadings, abbreviations, symbols, among others must be followed.  Permission from the copyright owner should be included for use of any figure previously published elsewhere.

Only electronic versions of the manuscripts will be accepted.  Manuscripts must be prepared using any readily available word processing software.

Authors should submit at least three separate document files:

        1. Title page: this contains the following: (a) title of manuscript, (b) running head, (c) author(s), (d) author affiliation, (e) contact information of the corresponding author including postal address, phone, fax, and email address;

        2. Manuscript: authors should remove all personal information in the actual manuscript, and should ensure that the actual manuscript contains no information that may indicate the identity of the authors.

        3. Cover letter: addressed to The Editor indicating the intention to submit the manuscript to the PJP and the type of article being submitted (i.e., regular research report, book review, etc.).  The letter should also affirm that the authors complied with all ethical guidelines related to research (see Ethical Principles and Guidelines for Philippine Psychologists), and that the manuscript being submitted has not been published in any form previously, and is not currently being considered for publication in any form elsewhere.

All submissions are done electronically; no submissions with hardcopies of the manuscripts will be accepted.  Authors should email their submissions to PJPEditor@yahoo. com.

Peer-Review Policy and Procedures

Upon submission, the Editor or one of the Associate Editors reads the manuscript and decides whether it is likely to be competitive for publication.  Within three to four weeks of submission, authors are notified by email that their manuscript either (a) has been declined without review or (b) has been sent to referees for peer-review.  For manuscripts that are reviewed, authors can expect a decision within 90 days after submission.  The editorial decision for such manuscripts shall be one of the following: (a) acceptance with routine or minor revisions, (b) revise and resubmit, or (c) rejection.

The PJP  implements a double blind peer review policy.  It also seeks to implement a constructive peer review policy, wherein referees are encouraged to provide authors with detailed comments that would help authors improve their manuscripts for publication.

Manuscripts that are accepted will be subject to edited to improve readability and effectiveness. Prior to actual publication, authors will be asked to review the pre-publication proofs of their manuscript, and to supply corrections and/or missing information.

Copyright

The copyright of all published manuscripts will be shared by the authors and the Psychological Association of the Philippines.  The shared copyright will apply to all printed and electronic copies of the manuscript, and will be affirmed by both parties in the copyright forms.

Literature Map Example: Catharsis Hypothesis

RESEARCH_Literature Map_E.g.

Re: “Catharsis Hypothesis”

Fr: Myers, D. G. (1999). Social Psychology (6^th ed.). McGraw-Hill College (Excerpts from Ch 10. “Aggression: Hurting others”, pp. 421-425.)

>PSYCHOANALYTIC THEORY 

--Catharsis Hypothesis = "we can purge emotions by experiencing them" (e.g., viewing classic tragic plays) -- [Aristotle], and by recalling and reliving past events (extension of the hypothesis) (p. 421).

                                = to excite an emotion is to release it (Butcher, 1951).

>versus SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY

--"Contrary to the catharsis hypothesis, expressing aggression more often breeds than reduces further aggression.

--The social learning approach suggests controlling aggression by counteracting the factors that provoke it -- by reducing aversive stimulation, by rewarding and modeling nonaggression, and by eliciting reactions incompatible with aggression" (p. 424).

>Areas of Dispute

--Pros

-->2:1 Americans agree that "sexual materials provide an outlet for bottled up impulses" (Niemi et al., 1989) (p. 421).

--Cons

-->Most Americans agree that "sexual materials lead people to commit rape" (p. 421).

-->viewing erotica does not lead to diminished sexual desire and viewing and treating women as sexual objects (Kelly et al., 1989; McKenzie-Mohr & Zauma, 1990).

-->American and Canadian spectators of football, wrestling, and hockey games exhibit more hostility after viewing the event than before (Arms et al., 1979; Goldstein & Arms, 1971; Russell, 1983).

-->After a war, a nation's murder rate tends to jump (Archer & Gartner, 1979).

-->When Florida State University students were allowed to counterattack someone who had provoked them, their arousal (as measured by blood pressures) did more quickly return to normal, BUT only when the target is the actual tormentor, not a substitute. Moreover, for the person not to feel guilty or anxious afterwards, (a) the retaliation must be justifiable, and (b) the target is nonintimidating.

-->100 laid off engineers and technicians, when given opportunity for verbal ventilation of hostility against their employer or supervisor (through interview questions like "What instances can you think of where the company has not been fair to you?"), increased their hostility (c/o Questionnaire assessing attitudes toward company and supervisors) (Ebbesen et al., 1975).

-->cruel acts [A] beget cruel attitudes [T/F] (cf. Ch 4).

-->little aggressive acts can lead to rationalizing / justifying further aggression (Milgram's obedience experiments) (p. 422).

-->Even if retaliation sometimes (in the short run) reduces tension, in the long run it reduces inhibition" (p. 422).

>Areas of Consensus

-->[Alternative: Assertion]

----Across cultures, those who reframe accusation "you| messages as "I" messages (e.g., "I'm angry" or "When you talk like that I feel irritated.") -- communicated their feelings in a way that better enables the other to make a positive response (Kubany et al., 1995) (p. 422).

-->[Conclusion]

----"Catharsis ... used to be a mainstay of psychoanalytic therapy, but no longer. Its main appeal is its afterglow. Its main drawback is that there is no evidence that it works" (Seligman, 1994, pp. 238-239) (p. 422).

----"It is time to put a bullet, once and for all, through the heart of the catharsis hypothesis. the belief that observing violence (for 'ventilating it') gets rid of hostilities has virtually never been supported by research" (Carol Tavis, 1988, p. 194) (p. 421).

----"The near consensus among social psychologists is that catharsis does not occur as Freud, Lorenz, and their followers supposed (Geen & Quantry, 1977)" (p. 421).

 

                                                   

 

 

 

how to make a literature map

RESEARCH_Literature Mapping

Fr: ro.uwe.ac.uk/Render Pages/RenderLearningObject.aspx?... (headings & underscore mine)

>Definition

= “broadly identifying the key concepts across the literature and how each paper or piece of material fits into the overall conceptual map” (before writing your Review of Related Literature and Studies)

>Importance

--Review of Literature

“Reviewing the literature is a major part of any research process. It is important for many reasons, including

----finding the basis for your research,

----checking the current knowledge and thinking in your subject area, and

----demonstrating that you can find, read and synthesize a range of literature in your subject domain.”

PS: Other related skills: literature sourcing, retrieval and management, including: effective reading, synthesis, rationale-building, organization, and writing.

--Literature Map

----It is useful for dividing your writing into chapters or sections.

----It is easier to manage writing if you break it down into smaller parts such as approaching each of the concepts you have identified individually, before pulling all the information together.

----It can help to identify issues such as proximity and connections in terms of ideas and findings.

>Steps

1. Write down the major themes for the literature which have relevance for your piece of research.

2. Write down any areas of consensus between different authors.

3. Write down any areas of dispute or disagreement between particular authors.

4. State if there are any special reasons which might account for the different views held by different authors.

E.g., conducted at different times and using different techniques

5. Note the implications of both the cases of consensus and disagreements have on your research if applicable.

6. Every time you read new literature ask yourself: Where does this paper fit in and does it alter any of my answers to the previous 5 questions?

7. Once you have reached a satisfactory stage, you might like to consider showing it to your supervisor and asking for feedback.

NB: It is advisable to keep your map as simple as possible: its purpose is to identify key concepts and how literature fits into these concepts.

--Think Map of Literature Mapping

 

>Example of Literature Map (Adapted from Fisher, 2004)

(Source: The Research Observatory (last edited 07/01/08. Bristol, UK: University of the West of England, Bristol) http://ro.uwe.ac.uk/FileStore/LearningObjects/ LearningObject263/syn10.pdf)

Research Q: “Evaluate the impact of the Internet on practices for recruitment and selection used by small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).”

Legend: bold = key concepts

            numbers = literature list number

            (You may prefer to use the authors’ names or include a little more detail,

              but that can take up more spaces.)

NB:

--The nearer the concepts are together, the closer their association.

--It is possible for an individual piece of literature to be applicable to more than one area.

--Some literature may give a good overview of the whole subject, e.g., a good review paper.

 

Table of Statistical Techniques (Pallant, 2010)

RESEARCH_QUANTITATIVE

Re: Table of Main Statistical Techniques

Fr: Adapted from Pallant, J. (2010). SPSS Survival Manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS. Berkshire, England: Open University Press.

I.             Purpose: Exploring Relationships

QUESTION (Example)	PARAMETRIC STATISTIC	NON-PARAMETRIC ALTERNATIVE	INDEPENDENT VARIABLE	DEPENDENT VARIABLE	ESSENTIAL FEATURES
What is the relationship between gender & dropout rates from therapy?	None	CHI-SQURE	1 categorical (e.g., sex = M/F)	1 categorical (e.g., dropout / complete = Y / N)	The number of cases in each category is considered, not scores.
Is there a relationship between age & optimism scores?	PEARSON PRODUCT-MOMENT CORRELATION (r)	SPEARMAN’S RANK ORDER CORRELATION (rho/ῤ)	2 continuous (e.g., age, optimism scores)		1 sample with scores on 2 different measures, or same measure at Time 1 & Time 2
After controlling for the effects of socially desirable responding bias, is there still a relationship between optimism & life satisfaction?	PARTIAL CORRELATION	None	2 continuous & 1 continuous you wish to control for (e.g., optimism, life satisfaction, scores on a desirability scale)		(same as above)

QUESTION (Example)	PARAMETRIC STATISTIC	NON-PARAMETRIC ALTERNATIVE	INDEPENDENT VARIABLE	DEPENDENT VARIABLE	ESSENTIAL FEATURES
How much of the variance in the life satisfaction scores can be explained by self-esteem, perceived control & optimism? Which of these variables is the best predictor?	MULTIPLE REGRESSION	None	Set of ≥ continuous (e.g., self-esteem, perceived control, optimism)	1 continuous (e.g., life satisfaction)	1 sample with scores on all measures
What is the underlying structure of the items that make up the Positive and Negative Affect Scale – how many factors are involved?	FACTOR ANALYSIS	None	Set of related continuous variables (e.g., items of the positive & negative affect scale)		1 sample, multiple measures

II.           Purpose: Comparing Groups

General Research Question: Is there a statistically significant difference among a number of GROUPS?

QUESTION (Example)	PARAMETRIC STATISTIC	NON-PARAMETRIC ALTERNATIVE	INDEPENDENT VARIABLE	DEPENDENT VARIABLE	ESSENTIAL FEATURES
Are males more likely to drop out of therapy than females?	None	CHI-SQUARE	1 categorical (e.g., sex)	1 categorical (e.g., dropout / complete therapy)	You are interested in the number of people in each category, not scores on a scale.
Are males more optimistic than females?	INDEPENDENT SAMPLES T-TEST	MANN-WHITNEY U TEST	1 categorical (2 levels) [e.g., sex]	1 continuous (e.g., optimism scores)	2 groups: different people in each group

QUESTION (Example)	PARAMETRIC STATISTIC	NON-PARAMETRIC ALTERNATIVE	INDEPENDENT VARIABLE	DEPENDENT VARIABLE	ESSENTIAL FEATURES
Is there a change in participants’ anxiety scores from Time 1 & Time 2?	PAIRED SAMPLES T-TEST	WILCOXON SIGNED-RANK TEST	1 categorical (2 levels) [e.g., Time 1 / Time 2)	1 continuous (e.g., optimism scores)	Same people on 2 different occasions
Is there a difference in optimism scores for people who are under 35 yrs, 35-39 yrs, & 50+ yrs?	ONE-WAY BETWEEN GROUPS ANOVA	KRUSKAL WALLIS	1 categorical (≥ 3  levels) [e.g., age group]	1 continuous (e.g., optimism scores)	≥ 3 groups: different people in each group
Is there a change in participants’ anxiety scores from Time 1, Time 2, & Time 3?	ONE-WAY REPEATED MEASURES ANOVA	FRIEDMAN TEST	1 categorical (≥ 3 levels) [e.g., Time 1 / Time 2 / Time 3]	1 continuous (e.g., anxiety scores)	≥ 3 groups: same people on 2 different occasions
Is there a difference in optimism scores for males & females, who are under 35 yrs, 36-39 yrs, & 50+ yrs?	TWO-WAY BETWEEN GROUPS ANOVA	None	2 categorical (≥ 2 levels) [e.g., age group, sex]	1 continuous (e.g., Fear of Statistics test scores)	≥ 2 groups with different people in each group, each measure on ≥ 2 occasion

QUESTION (Example)	PARAMETRIC STATISTIC	NON-PARAMETRIC ALTERNATIVE	INDEPENDENT VARIABLE	DEPENDENT VARIABLE	ESSENTIAL FEATURES
Which intervention (math skills / confidence building) is more effective in reducing participants’ fear of statistics, measured across 3 time periods?	MIXED BETWEEN-WITHIN ANOVA	None	1 between-groups variable (≥ 2 levels), 1 within-groups variable (≥ 2 levels) [e.g., type of intervention, Time]	1 continuous (e.g., Fear of Statistics test scores)	≥ 2 groups with different people in each group, each measured on ≥ 2 occasions
Is there a difference between males & females, across 3 different age groups in terms of their scores on a variety of adjustment measures (anxiety, depression, & perceived stress)?	MULTIVARIATE ANOVA (MANOVA)	None	≥ 1 categorical (≥ 2 levels) [e.g., age group, sex]	≥ 2 related continuous (e.g., anxiety, depression & perceived stress scores)
Is there a significant difference in the Fear of Stats test scores for participants in the Maths skills groups & the confidence building group, while controlling for their scores on this test at Time 1?	ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE (ANCOVA)	None	≥ 1 categorical independent (≥ 2 levels), 1 continuous covariate (e.g., type of intervention, Fear of Stats test scores at Time 1)	1 continuous (e.g., Fear of Stats test scores at Time 2)