PH journal of psychiatry publication guide (notes)

 

Philippine Journal of Psychiatry PUBLICATION GUIDELINES

I. TITLE PAGE

>concise & informative title

>author’s name with highest academic degree

>institution to which work can be attributed or where research study was conducted

>title should include study DESIGN esp for randomized controlled trials (RCTs)*

>NB:* = any research project that prospectively assigns human subjects to intervention or concurrent comparison or control groups to study the cause and effect between a MEDICAL INTERVENTION and a HEALTH OUTCOME

>author responsible for corresponding about manuscript (Corresponding Author) & author to whom requests for reprints should be addressed : name, phone, & cell phone #, mailing & email address

>include source of SUPPORT – grants, equipment, drugs

>if presented in national or international meeting: full details of meeting e.g., title, place & date

 

II. ABSTRACT

>include:

       A. Objectives = purpose of study or research question

       B. Methodology = study design, selection process, setting, subjects, observational

          & analytical methods, intervention(s) if any & main outcome measure(s)

       C. Results = main findings of research in relation to objectives stated & give

          statistical significance of observations

       D. Conclusion = primary conclusions with emphasis on NEW & IMPORTANT

          aspects or observations & FUNDING SOURCE

> ≤ 250 words

>5 key words under which article will be indexed

 

III. TEXT

A.    INTROUDCTION

>provide context & rationale of study, i.e., nature of problem & significance

>specify purpose or research OBJECTIVES or HYPOTHESIS being tested

>NB: research objective may be stated as a question

 

B.    METHODOLOGY

>describe HOW & WHY study done in a particular way in as much detail re: Study Design & with enough Technical Information that would allow others to REPRODUCE results

 

>Method of Selection – inclusion & exclusion criteria, data collection, & data analysis procedure CONCISE yet EASILY UNDERSTANDABLE

 

>Description of Study Participants

--include Source Population

--explain relevance of inclusion / exclusion criteria & demographic variables chosen, e.g. why only women 40-60 years old

--how variables were measured

 

>Ethical Considerations

--rationale: PROTECT human subjects & animals

--include: when Informed Consent obtained, if procedures followed were in accord with Ethical Standards of Committees on Human Experimentation (National or International) as well as with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975 (revised 2008)

--NB: Do not use patients’ names, initials, or HOSPITAL NUMBER, especially in illustrative materials.

 

C.    RESULTS

>Findings

--report only those RELATED DIRECTLY to Research Objectives

 

>Numbers

--give numeric results as ABSOLUTE NUMBERS & %ages as well as how they were statistically ANALYZED

--use metric of S.I. units of measurement & specify all units of measurement clearly

--use only STANDARD ABBREVIATIONS

--statistically SIGNIFICANT results – report observed test statistic value, degrees of freedom, probability level, & for t & F tests, whether repeated measures were used

 

>Tables & Figures (T&F)

--include only if they represent RELEVANT numerical data MORE CLEARLY than could be done in the text

--DO NOT REPEAT all the data in tables, graphs or illustrations in the text, where only the most important observations are summarized.

--label appropriately & number consecutively in order of their first citation in the text using ARABIC NUMBERS

--NB: Be sure that each T&F is CITED in the text, otherwise don’t include it.

 

>Tables (T)

--cell aligned on TOP LEFT, single spaced or AUTOFIT TO CONTENTS of cell with ALL gridlines visible

--put heading for each T COLUMN & brief title for all Ts ABOVE them

--NB: Explanation or discussion of results in the T should be placed BEFORE the T & place T NUMBER referred to AFTER paragraph where it is mentioned, e.g. (Table 2)

 

>Figures (F)

--should be as SELF-EXPLANATORY as possible

--F # & title should be placed BELOW the F

--NB: Explanations for the Fs are placed AFTER the F & indicate in parentheses which F was being described (e.g. Figure 2).

 

>Images (I)

--re: x-ray films, scans & other diagnostic images, & pictures of pathological specimens or photomicrographs

--send sharp, glossy, black & white or color photographic prints 5x7” or 127x173mm in camera ready form

--write authors at back of each plate

--phonomicrographs

·       With internal scale markers

·       Place tiles & detailed explanations in the LEGENDS (not in the illustrations)

·       Explain internal scale & identify method of staining

·       LEGEND: identify & explain every symbol, arrow, # or letters

 

>Graphs

--list on separate page, VALUES for data points (in case reviewers / editors need to

recreate some figures

 

>Appendices

--for supplementary material & technical detail (rationale: accessible but not interrupt

flow of text)

--number in sequence of reference in the text (e.g., Appendix 3)

--NB: Checklists & Questionnaires generally NOT published.

 

D.    DISCUSSION

--emphasize NEW & IMPORTANT aspects of the study & conclusions

--link CONCLUSIONS with study GOALS but avoid unqualified statements or conclusions NOT SUPPORTED by data

--include RECOMMENDATIONS when appropriate

--NB: Do NOT repeat results in discussion BUT rather give EXPLANATIONS for the findings & COMPARE & CONTRAST results with other relevant studies

--state LIMITATIONS of study

--explore IMPLICATIONS of findings for future research & clinical practice

 

E.    ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

--disclosure statements of SPONSORING bodies may be required for studies promoting PRODUCTS or SERVICES described in paper

--one or more statements should specify CONTRIBUTIONS that need acknowledging BUT do not justify authorship, e.g., emotional, financial, material or technical support

--“CORRESPONDING AUTHOR” should submit written permission to be acknowledged for all acknowledged individuals before printing

 

F.    REFERENCES

--cite only RELEVANT references, preferably from ORIGINAL researches in TEST & listed according to order of appearance using ARABIC numerals in parenthesis or superscript

--limit to PUBLISHED, accepted for publication or presented at a major national meeting

--name (“in press” or “forthcoming”)

--if UNPUBLISHED material is cited – indicate source & year in parentheses in text or in footnote

--NB: Avoid “personal communication” unless essential information unavailable from a published source – (name & date in parenthesis in test). For scientific articles, obtain WRITTEN permission & confirmation of accuracy from source.

--NB: Avoid using ABSTRACTS as references.

--NB: ACCURACY of citation is author’s responsibility.

--NB: ABBREVIATIONS of journal names should conform to those used in INDEX MEDICUS.

research online resources

·       Research Methods (e.g., impact studies) & Content

www.unicef-irc.org

·       Online Statistics Calculator

graphpad.com/quickcalcs/index.cfm

·       Online Survey Tool

www.surveymonkey.com

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.