Journal Article Reporting Standards in the light of American Psychological Association Style

This chapter provides a few guidelines for conducting, interpreting, and reporting primary and secondary research on children and adolescents who are deaf. The focus is on publishing in refereed journals that adhere to the reporting standards of the publication manual of the American Psychological Association. The chapter addresses a few salient quality indicators or desirable research characteristics such as theoretical frameworks, literature review, and sample demographics. Problematic areas such as plagiarism and piecemeal publications are covered, as are the notion of balance within manuscripts and the use of scholarly caution and language in interpreting data. Finally, the chapter ends with recommendations for researchers who are interested in investigating the educational achievement of students who are deaf.

Download Full-text

Communication Vagueness in the Literature Review Section of Journal Article Submissions

Journal of Educational Issues ◽

10.5296/jei.v4i1.12995 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 4 (1) ◽

pp. 174 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie

Keyword(s):

Literature Review ◽

Empirical Research ◽

Journal Article ◽

American Psychological Association ◽

Research Articles ◽

Lead Author ◽

Reference List ◽

American Psychological ◽

Review Section ◽

Body Reference

Evidence has been provided about the importance of avoiding American Psychological Association (APA) errors in the abstract, body, reference list, and table sections of empirical research articles. Specifically, authors are significantly more likely to have their manuscripts rejected for publication if they fail to avoid APA violations—and, thus, do not write with discipline—in these sections. In addition to adhering to APA, writing with discipline also includes avoiding communication vagueness. Thus, I analyzed communication vagueness in the literature review section of 71 manuscripts submitted to the journal Research in the Schools over a 3-year period. Findings revealed that the frequency of communication vagueness differed in relation to the following: (a) number of APA errors, (b) gender of lead author, (c) genre of manuscript, and (d) adjudication decisions. In particular, certain communication vagueness categories were statistically significant and practically significant predictors of whether or not a manuscript is rejected for publication by the editor. Implications of these findings are discussed.

Download Full-text

Violence against Children in the Family and the Community. Edited by P. Trickett and C. Schellenbach. American Psychological Association, Washington DC, 1998. pp. 512. £31.95 (hb).

Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry ◽

10.1017/s0021963099254819 ◽

2000 ◽

Vol 41 (1) ◽

pp. 133-136

Author(s):

Gerrilyn Smith

Keyword(s):

American Psychological Association ◽

Washington Dc ◽

American Psychological ◽

Violence Against Children ◽

The Family

Download Full-text

Fool’s Gold: Psychologists Using Disingenuous Reasoning to Mislead Legislatures into Granting Psychologists Prescriptive Authority

American Journal of Law & Medicine ◽

10.1017/s0098858800002586 ◽

2003 ◽

Vol 29 (4) ◽

pp. 489-524

Author(s):

Brent Pollitt

Keyword(s):

Primary Care ◽

Mental Illness ◽

Nurse Practitioners ◽

Primary Care Physicians ◽

American Psychological Association ◽

The United States ◽

Psychotropic Medications ◽

American Psychological ◽

Training Requirements ◽

Prescriptive Authority

Mental illness is a serious problem in the United States. Based on “current epidemiological estimates, at least one in five people has a diagnosable mental disorder during the course of a year.” Fortunately, many of these disorders respond positively to psychotropic medications. While psychiatrists write some of the prescriptions for psychotropic medications, primary care physicians write more of them. State legislatures, seeking to expand patient access to pharmacological treatment, granted physician assistants and nurse practitioners prescriptive authority for psychotropic medications. Over the past decade other groups have gained some form of prescriptive authority. Currently, psychologists comprise the primary group seeking prescriptive authority for psychotropic medications.The American Society for the Advancement of Pharmacotherapy (“ASAP”), a division of the American Psychological Association (“APA”), spearheads the drive for psychologists to gain prescriptive authority. The American Psychological Association offers five main reasons why legislatures should grant psychologists this privilege: 1) psychologists’ education and clinical training better qualify them to diagnose and treat mental illness in comparison with primary care physicians; 2) the Department of Defense Psychopharmacology Demonstration Project (“PDP”) demonstrated non-physician psychologists can prescribe psychotropic medications safely; 3) the recommended post-doctoral training requirements adequately prepare psychologists to prescribe safely psychotropic medications; 4) this privilege will increase availability of mental healthcare services, especially in rural areas; and 5) this privilege will result in an overall reduction in medical expenses, because patients will visit only one healthcare provider instead of two–one for psychotherapy and one for medication.

Download Full-text