Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin offers an international forum for the rapid dissemination of original empirical papers in all areas of personality and social psychology. The journal is published monthly - so you'll receive over 120 of the best articles each and every year.
Debate and Controversy
Each issue of Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin brings you challenging articles that stimulate dialogue and reflect the many schools of thought now active in the field. At the forefront of new developments, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin reports research as it occurs. In fact, PSPB's innovative articles often provide the first accounts of research breakthroughs.
In Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, you'll find articles by distinguished scholars on a variety of contemporary topics. Examples include attitudes and attitude changes, close relationships, gender and age stereotypes, group processes, intergroup relations, interpersonal attraction, morality, political action, prejudice, self-concept, social influence, and values.
Visit SPSP's journal homepage for additional information.
This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
The Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin is an official journal for the Society of Personality and Social Psychology. The journal is an international outlet for original empirical papers in all areas of personality and social psychology.
|Michael D. Robinson||North Dakota State University, USA|
|Yuen J. Huo||University of California, Los Angeles, USA|
|Emily A. Impett||University of Toronto Mississauga, Canada|
|Benjamin M. Wilkowski||University of Wyoming, USA|
|Sapna Aswal||SAGE Publications|
|Joshua M. Ackerman||University of Michigan, USA|
|Guido Alessandri||Sapienza University of Rome, Italy|
|Marco Brambilla||University of Milano Bicocca, Italy|
|William J. Chopik||Michigan State University, USA|
|Lucian Gideon Conway III||Grove City College, USA|
|Maureen A. Craig||New York University, USA|
|Jaap J. A. Denissen||Utrecht University, Netherlands|
|Leonel Garcia-Marques||University of Lisbon, Faculty of Psychology, Portugal|
|Judith Gere||Kent State University, USA|
|Katharine H. Greenaway||University of Melbourne, Australia|
|Keiko Ishii||Nagoya University, Japan|
|Joshua J. Jackson||Washington University in St. Louis, USA|
|Michael W. Kraus||Yale University, USA|
|Justin F. Landy||Nova Southeastern University, USA|
|Andrea L. Meltzer||Florida State University, USA|
|Corinne A. Moss-Racusin||Skidmore College, USA|
|John V. Petrocelli||Wake Forest University, USA|
|Jason E. Plaks||University of Toronto, Canada|
|Jessica D. Remedios||Tufts University, USA|
|Luis M. Rivera||Rutgers University-Newark, USA|
|Kate Sweeny||University of California, Riverside, USA|
|Eddie M. W. Tong||National University of Singapore, Singapore|
|Sarah S. M. Townsend||University of Southern California, USA|
|Michelle R. vanDellen||University of Georgia, USA|
|Gregory D. Webster||University of Florida, USA|
|Angela J. Bahns||Wellesley College, USA|
|Levi R. Baker||University of North Carolina at Greensboro, USA|
|Fiona Kate Barlow||The University of Queensland, Australia|
|Peter Belmi||University of Virginia, USA|
|Monica Biernat||University of Kansas, USA|
|Kevin R. Binning||University of Pittsburgh, USA|
|Kevin L. Blankenship||Iowa State University, USA|
|Wiebke Bleidorn||Wiebke Bleidorn, University of California, Davis, USA|
|Courtney Bonam||University of California, Santa Cruz, USA|
|Mark J. Brandt||Michigan State University, USA|
|Tiffany N. Brannon||University of California, Los Angeles, USA|
|Nyla R. Branscombe||University of Kansas, USA|
|Amy B. Brunell||The Ohio State University, Mansfield, USA|
|Brad J. Bushman||The Ohio State University, USA|
|C. Daryl Cameron||The Pennsylvania State University, USA|
|Erika N. Carlson||University of Toronto Mississauga, Canada|
|Trevor I. Case||Macquarie University, Australia|
|Lei Chang||University of Macau, China|
|David S. Chester||Virginia Commonwealth University, USA|
|Margaret S. Clark||Yale University, USA|
|Taya R. Cohen||Carnegie Mellon University, USA|
|Angelo B. Costa||Pontificia Universidade Catolica do Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil|
|Christian S. Crandall||University of Kansas, USA|
|Jarret Crawford||The College of New Jersey, USA|
|Jennifer Crocker||Ohio State University, USA|
|Jan De Houwer||Ghent University, Department of Experimental Clinical and Health Psychology, Belgium|
|Thomas F. Denson||University of New South Wales, Australia|
|M. Brent Donnellan||Michigan State University, USA|
|John F. Dovidio||Yale University, USA|
|Daniel A. Effron||London Business School, UK|
|Anthony M. Evans||University of Tilburg, Netherlands|
|Tal Eyal||Ben Gurion University of the Negev, Israel|
|Russell H. Fazio||Ohio State University, USA|
|Frank D. Fincham||Florida State University, USA|
|David C. Funder||University of California, Riverside, USA|
|Randi L. Garcia||Smith College, USA|
|Wendi L. Gardner||Northwestern University, USA|
|Bertram Gawronski||The University of Texas at Austin, USA|
|Yuthika U. Girme||Simon Fraser University, Canada|
|Peter Glick||Lawrence University, USA|
|Mario Gollwitzer||Philipps-Universität Marburg, Germany|
|Amie Gordon||University of Michigan, USA|
|Nick Haslam||University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia|
|Steven J. Heine||University of British Columbia, Canada|
|Erin P. Hennes||Purdue University, USA|
|P.J. Henry||New York University Abu Dhabi, USA|
|Joshua A. Hicks||Texas A&M University, USA|
|Verlin B. Hinsz||North Dakota State University, USA|
|Arnold K. Ho||University of Michigan, USA|
|Sara D. Hodges||University of Oregon, USA|
|Vera Hoorens||KU Leuven, Belgium|
|Jeremy P. Jamieson||University of Rochester, USA|
|Samantha Joel||Western University, Canada|
|Camille S. Johnson||San Jose State University, USA|
|Peter K. Jonason||University of Padua, Italy|
|Kimberly Kahn||Portland State University, USA|
|Mary E. Kite||Ball State University, USA|
|Joachim Krueger||Brown University, USA|
|Nour Kteily||Northwestern University, USA|
|Robert D. Latzman||Georgia State University, USA|
|Sean M. Laurent||University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA|
|Kristin Laurin||University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada|
|Alysson E. Light||University of the Sciences, USA|
|Jennifer Lodi-Smith||Canisius College, USA|
|Richard E. Lucas||Michigan State University, Department of Psychology, USA|
|Laura V. Machia||Syracuse University, USA|
|C. Neil Macrae||University of Aberdeen, Scotland, UK|
|Keith B. Maddox||Tufts University, USA|
|E. J. Masicampo||Wake Forest University, USA|
|Khairul A. Mastor||Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Malaysia|
|Allen R. McConnell||Miami University, USA|
|Brian P. Meier||Gettysburg College, USA|
|Yuri Miyamoto||Hitotsubashi University, Japan|
|Nora A. Murphy||Loyola Marymount University, USA|
|Rebecca Neel||University of Toronto, Canada|
|Michele Nuijten||Tilburg University, Netherlands|
|Nickola C. Overall||University of Auckland, New Zealand|
|Daphna Oyserman||University of Southern California, USA|
|Efrén O. Pérez||University of California, Los Angeles, USA|
|Sylvia Perry||Northwestern University, USA|
|Richard E. Petty||Ohio State University, USA|
|Evava S. Pietri||Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, USA|
|E. Ashby Plant||Florida State University, USA|
|Nairán Ramírez-Esparza||University of Connecticut, USA|
|Kyle Ratner||University of California, Santa Barbara, USA|
|Harry T. Reis||University of Rochester, USA|
|Jane L. Risen||University of Chicago, USA|
|Steven O. Roberts||Stanford University, USA|
|Clay Routledge||North Dakota State University, USA|
|Tamar Saguy||IDC, Israel|
|John Sakaluk||Western University, Canada|
|Diana T. Sanchez||Rutgers University-New Brunswick, USA|
|Krishna Savani||Nanyang Technological University, Singapore|
|Rebecca J. Schlegel||Texas A&M University, USA|
|Toni Schmader||University of British Columbia, Canada|
|Abigail A. Scholer||University of Waterloo, Canada|
|Joanna Schug||College of William & Mary, USA|
|Norbert Schwarz||University of Southern California, Department of Psychology and Marshall School of Business, USA|
|Hema P. Selvanathan||The University of Queensland, Australia|
|J. Nicole Shelton||Princeton University, USA|
|Nurit Shnabel||Tel-Aviv University, Israel|
|Jason T. Siegel||Claremont Graduate University, USA|
|Paul Silvia||University of North Carolina at Greensboro, USA|
|Linda J. Skitka||The University of Illinois at Chicago, USA|
|Richard B. Slatcher||University of Georgia, USA|
|Michael Slepian||Columbia University, USA|
|Erica B. Slotter||Villanova University, USA|
|Olga Stavrova||Tilburg University, Netherlands|
|Chadly Stern||University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, USA|
|Jerry Suls||Feinstein Institute for Medical Research, USA|
|Joseph A. Vitriol||Lehigh University, USA|
|William von Hippel||University of Queensland, Australia|
|Paul H. White||University of Utah, USA|
|Robert E. Wickham||Northern Arizona University, USA|
|Clara L. Wilkins||Washington University in St. Louis, USA|
|James H. Wirth||The Ohio State University at Newark, USA|
|Kumar Yogeeswaran||University of Canterbury, New Zealand|
|Michael Zarate||University of Texas at El Paso, USA|
|Cristina Zogmaister||University of Milan-Bicocca, Italy|
The Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin (PSPB) is an official publication of the Society of Personality and Social Psychology (SPSP), Inc. PSPB is an international outlet for the rapid dissemination of original contributions based on empirical data in all areas of personality and social psychology. Occasionally, PSPB publishes other pieces of particular interest to members of SPSP, such as special topic issues, selected symposia, and invited addresses.
All papers submitted to PSPB are reviewed with respect to their scholarly merit and the extent to which they advance valid knowledge about social behavior. To this end, submissions that include meta-analyses, replications, alternatives to null hypothesis significance testing, and single as well as multiple studies, are all considered.
SPSP recommends that authors read “Improving the Dependability of Research in Personality and Social Psychology” and APA’s Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct Standard 8 before submitting manuscripts to PSPB.
Promoting Inclusive Excellence in Publications
As of April 1, 2023 PSPB has adopted recommendations from the SPSP's Anti-Colorism and Eurocentrism in Methods and Practices (ACEMAP) task force to promote inclusive excellence in publications. You may find the recommendations integrated below in the submission guidelines with the headers, “we encourage.”
We Encourage Diverse Methods: PSPB values diverse methods of inquiry that are often more suitable for studying diverse populations and capturing heterogeneity within these populations. Such methods might include those that use a combination of qualitative and qualitative methods that emphasize the experiences of people in their own words, community-based research, as well as person-centered rather than variable-centered analyses.
TOP Level II Guidelines
As of January 1, 2021 PSPB has adopted TOP Level II guidelines. Some important changes to existing PSPB guidelines include:
- Authors must post the following in a trusted repository (see trusted repositories) and link to them in the manuscript. The link must be included in the beginning of the first method section for this paper.
- Materials (i.e., a methodology file; see below for further details)
- Analysis code
- Any data that is not already publicly accessible
- A codebook for interpreting the data file(s) describing all variables and how they are coded
- Authors need to state whether study and analysis plan pre-registration exists or not.
Exceptions should be communicated to the Editor directly in the cover letter and acknowledged in the Author Note on the title page. If you think you might need to request an exception, please check this FAQ guide first for help navigating common challenges to data and code sharing.
Compliance with these policies is verified upon submission of manuscripts. Failure to comply with the policies will prevent submission and review of manuscripts.
Style: All manuscripts should follow the style guidelines set forth in the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, Seventh Edition (APA, 2020).
Citations: Please take care to give credit where credit is due. In addition to citing papers, please cite and list in the reference section all data sets, programs, analytic tools and apps, and code/packages (with version numbers) that are not original to the current manuscript. Whenever possible, include a persistent identifier, such as a Digital Object Identifier (DOI). For example, an author using the R package lsr would run the code [citation("lsr")] to find the appropriate citation information, cite the package in the manuscript text [e.g., “We used R package lsr (Version 0.5; Navarro, 2015)”], and include it in their reference section:
Navarro, D. J. (2015). Learning statistics with R: A tutorial for psychology students and other beginners (Version 0.5). Adelaide, Australia: University of Adelaide.
We Encourage Inclusive Citation Practices: Authors are encouraged to adopt inclusive citation practices that can help reduce bias in the citation process and better ground their work in the relevant literatures across different sub-areas and disciplines. Additional resources are available here.
Length: Manuscripts must not exceed 10,000 words in length, including the abstract, references and notes, but excluding the title page, tables, and figures. The word count must appear on the title page. Rare exceptions to this policy can be requested as part of the submission process (justified by the nature, number, or complexity of studies or methods reported, for example). Even in such cases, authors should strive to come as close as possible to 10,000 words.
Abstract and keywords: The page following the title page must include an abstract of no more than 150 words, and below the abstract, 4-5 keywords.
All manuscripts must include a report of the following items for each study:
- Explain how sample size was determined, including whether and how looking at the results influenced the collection of additional data. If sample size was determined ahead of time using a power analysis, please report the basis for the expected effect size and all information required to reproduce the power analysis.
- Report (1) the total number of excluded observations, (2) the reasons for making these exclusions, (3) how they were distributed across conditions.
- Disclose the existence of all variables and conditions that were part of the study. These can be summarized, or put in a footnote or supplementary material in the case of large numbers of variables, but there should be enough information for a reader to judge whether the variables and/or conditions are potentially theoretically relevant or not.
- State the above two disclosures in the text of the manuscript (e.g., “We report all manipulations, measures, and exclusions in these studies”).
- Report procedures in sufficient detail to allow close replication by an independent lab.
- All manuscripts should report complete statistics relevant to the analyses, using supplementary materials if needed:
- Cell means, SD, and n for experimental designs
- Correlations between variables for multivariate designs including regression and repeated-measures
- Inferential statistics with exact p-values (to 3 decimal places), effect sizes, and confidence intervals for effect sizes regardless of significance level
- If figures use error bars, these should be explained in a caption (e.g., standard error, 95% confidence interval, etc.)
- If meeting any of these requirements proves impractical, authors should explain why
We Encourage More Complete and Inclusive Reporting of Sample Characteristics
Complete Reporting of Sample Demographics: Report a more detailed set of demographic variables (i.e., beyond Age & Gender/Sex) about the sample when relevant for understanding the study's findings and their generalizability. Focus on demographic variables that are relevant to both the Local Context and the Research Question, noting any Exclusions, while using Inclusive and Bias-Free Language.
- Relevance to Local Context: For example, race/ethnicity is often relevant to report in research conducted within the United States; but caste or religion may be more relevant in other cultural contexts.
- Relevance to Research Question: For example, gender, relationship status, and sexual identity are often relevant to Close Relationship studies; but political ideology may be more relevant to Political psychology research. Consider reporting intersectional identities when relevant.
- Explain Exclusions: Explain any exclusions of populations from the sample, the reasons for the exclusions, and implications they have for the generalizability of the findings.
- Use Inclusive Language: For the U.S. context, APA resources on inclusive and bias-free language ( https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/bias-free-language) are useful. For non-U.S. contexts, different language may be needed (e.g., asking participants to describe themselves in their own words).
- Note: Tables or Online Supplements can be used to report this information concisely while complying with journal word limits.
- Note: No one example should be considered “perfect” or authoritative in all contexts, because the precise demographic variables that should be reported depend on the local context and research question. The following two examples are meant to provide authors with guidance on how to report the demographic characteristics of their sample in two different contexts – see examples here.
- Additional resources are available here.
Method/Materials File Guidelines: Authors are required to post to a trusted public online repository all stimulus materials that are not already publicly accessible, including the verbatim wording of all independent and dependent variable instructions, manipulations, and measures. A link to the materials should appear in the text of the manuscript. Exceptions must be identified at article submission. (If the research was conducted in a language other than English, the materials file can provide the original materials and a rough translation into English that has been created using Google Translate or a similar free online program, as long as the manuscript itself provides sufficient detail for reviewers and readers to evaluate the presented research.)
Data sharing: Data (including all columns of data described anywhere in the manuscript) must be posted to trusted repository (see trusted repositories) and a link should appear in the manuscript. Exceptions must be identified at article submission. If you are using existing datasets that are already publicly accessible, please provide a link with appropriate citation (no need to upload separately). Data should ideally be in csv or a non-proprietary format. Ensure uploaded data are anonymous (e.g., make sure to remove potentially identifying information such as IP address, birthday, email address, name, latitude and longitude). Authors should also be cautious when posting rich datasets from identifiable subgroups and ensure that individuals cannot be identified based on “triangulating” across demographic variables such as age, gender, ethnicity, occupation, school, etc.
Codebook: Authors should provide a guide to interpreting the data file (sometimes called a data dictionary or codebook). The codebook should define (a) what every variable name in the data file means (how it connects to the variables in the materials file) and (b) how each variable is coded (e.g., 0 = failed attention check, 1 = passed attention check). Even if authors cannot share all columns of data described in the manuscript, describe them all in the codebook. Here are some examples of codebooks that accomplish these criteria, as illustrations: Project Implicit, Joel (2018).
Code sharing: Analysis code must be posted to a trusted repository and a link should appear in the manuscript. Exceptions must be identified at article submission. Authors must provide (commented/annotated) program code or syntax that demonstrates how data were analyzed or otherwise provide sufficient details to exactly reproduce all results in the manuscript.
Result reporting: Data-based submissions must:
- Report effect sizes and their confidence intervals for primary findings in each study.
- Address issues of sample size and consequent issues of power in each study or, in the case of multiple-study articles, in the context of evaluating the overall case for the reliability of the primary findings. Please do not report “observed” power for a test calculated using the effect size estimate from that same test.
We Encourage Authors to Consider Constraints on Generality: Please attend to constraints on generality:
- Clearly describe the population that the empirical findings or theoretical model are expected to apply to.
- If generalizability is a goal of the paper, engage in a theoretical discussion of what the sample characteristics (particularly in terms of race/ethnicity, social status and power dynamics, nationality, and cultural context) might mean for the generalizability of the findings, models, and/or conclusions. Highlight any empirical and/or theoretical rationales for whether/how findings are expected to vary depending on sample characteristics.
- Examples here.
Statistical power: Please report at least one power analysis for each study (see calculating and reporting power for guidance on selecting an appropriate power analysis and examples of how to write them up). Describe all information necessary for an independent researcher to reproduce the results of your power analysis, including the program you used, the specific test for which you were calculating power (e.g., was it one of the main effects, an interaction, or a follow-up pairwise comparison?), and all input values (e.g., effect size estimate, alpha, one-or-two-sided test, desired power, mean or median correlation among repeated measures).
Preregistration: Please indicate within the manuscript whether each of the following elements for each study was preregistered and (if yes) provide a link to the time-stamped preregistration:
- Study design (e.g. number of conditions, how key variables will be measured)
- Planned sample size or a pre-planned stopping rule
- Inclusion/exclusion criteria
- Planned analyses
Feel free to adapt the sample statements available here. If the answers to all questions are the same for all studies in the manuscript, you can include one overall statement for all studies. Any pre-registration form/template can be used, as long as they are publicly viewable in an independent registry that provides time-stamps and persistent links (options include: Aspredicted.org, clinicaltrials.gov, and OSF.io).
For preregistered planned analyses: Please include a statement in the main body of the manuscript confirming that you have (a) reported all pre-registered analyses in the main body of the manuscript, appendices, and/or supplemental materials and (b) clearly marked any deviations from the preregistered analysis plan in the main body of the paper.
Deviations from preregistration: Note any deviations from pre-registration in the main text of the manuscript and include reasons for the deviations. There are many reasons why deviations may occur (e.g., data extremely violating assumptions of pre-registered tests, unforeseen needed exclusions criteria) and deviations are not inherently problematic; they simply need to be clearly reported so that reviewers and readers have access to the information. If any pre-registered planned analyses are not included in the main manuscript, authors should make clear where those analyses do appear (e.g. in a specific appendix or supplement) or provide a rationale for not reporting the analyses at all.
Exploratory analyses: Unplanned analyses that are done in addition to pre-registered planned analysis do not need to be labelled as deviations, since they are supplementing the pre-registered analyses rather than replacing them. However, these analyses should be clearly marked as not being part of the pre-registered analyses.
Replication: PSPB will now consider manuscripts that directly (or closely) replicate the procedures of studies previously published at PSPB. Following other journals (e.g., Psychological Science and Journal of Research in Personality), the authors of a replication study must clearly articulate their rationale for conducting the replication and the interest value of it. Authors should inform the Editor that they are planning this replication-related work and this email should articulate the potential value of the contribution. Subsequently, the research will be evaluated in a two-stage sequence, the first of which involves an evaluation of the proposal (introduction plus methods and analysis plan) and the second of which involves an evaluation of the final product.
Double-anonymize review: PSPB conforms to a double-anonymize peer review process. Please ensure that supporting files are anonymized as much as possible. If using the OSF, authors can create a view-only link that will remove their names from the project by checking the “anonymize” option (see https://help.osf.io/hc/en-us/articles/360019930333-Create-a-View-only-Link-for-a-Project). If using AsPredicted, authors can create an anonymous PDF and include this URL in the paper for review purposes. Avoid using self-citations. If you include an essential self-citation, the citation should not be anonymised. If necessary, it should be referred to in the third person, e.g. write "Jones and Xi (2020) have shown", not "we have previously shown (Jones & Xi, 2020)".
Ethical Practices verification: Corresponding authors of submitted papers must verify that:
- the same or substantially similar manuscript has not been simultaneously submitted for consideration by another journal
- the same or substantially similar manuscript has not already been published in whole or part
- data collection complied with current APA Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct
- the raw data and related coding information underlying all findings of empirically-based publications will be shared consistent with SPSP’s (2020) Data Sharing Policy
PSPB is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and follows a confidential and ethical peer review process, including (but not limited to) the Sage Peer Review Ethics guidelines. Among other implications, authors are asked to refrain from sharing decision letters or reviews in any public manner.
Sage Track Submission: All manuscripts must be submitted through Sage Track. Authors will receive login and password information to access the system and upload manuscripts. If you need submission assistance, contact the Managing Editor at Sage Publications.
If you or your funder wish your article to be freely available online to nonsubscribers immediately upon publication (gold open access), you can opt for it to be included in Sage Choice, subject to payment of a publication fee. The manuscript submission and peer review procedure is unchanged. On acceptance of your article, you will be asked to let Sage know directly if you are choosing Sage Choice. To check journal eligibility and the publication fee, please visit Sage Choice. For more information on open access options and compliance at Sage, including self author archiving deposits (green open access) visit Sage Publishing Policies on our Journal Author Gateway. Any inquiries regarding manuscript submission may be directed to the Managing Editor’s office:
Managing Editor, PSPB