Health Psychology

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.

Submissions are handled only through our Editorial Manager platform, and the only official journal website is through APA. If you believe you interacted with a fraudulent website for this journal, please email APA Journals. Review our resource for authors for more information on identifying predatory journals.

Please follow the submission guidelines detailed below. Manuscripts that do not conform to our Instructions to Authors may be returned without review.

Manuscript submission

Prepare manuscripts according to the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association using the 7^th edition. Manuscripts may be copyedited for bias-free language (see Chapter 5 of the Publication Manual). APA Style and Grammar Guidelines for the 7^th edition are available.

Submit Manuscript

Contact our Peer Review Coordinator Katt Fambrough, if you have questions about submitting a manuscript or if you do not receive confirmation of your submission within three business days.

Some institutional spam filters may block emails from our editorial office or from APA Journals. If this happens, add "apa.org" to your safe address list and ask your IT service to add it to their white list.

Submission Process

Our Editorial Manager system will ask you for the following items during the submission process.

Article Type: Indicate whether the manuscript is a regular article , a brief report , or a submission for a special issue or series . Some special issues and special series submissions require permission or are by invitation only; please obtain permission if needed before choosing one of the special article types.

Files: You will be asked to upload the following files:

• Cover letter. The letter should briefly describe the paper; explain how it fits within the journal’s scope; and confirm that it has not been published, is not under review elsewhere, and does not contain data that are under review or that have been published elsewhere. It should also confirm that all authors have reviewed the final version of the paper that is being submitted.
• Manuscript. See the Manuscript section (below) for instructions.
• Tables and Figures: Place tables and figures at the end of the manuscript, after the references, with one table or figure per page. Include page numbers on the table and figure pages.
• Supplemental Materials: You may place a variety of materials in an online-only supplement, such as 1) methodological details, tables, and figures that are not essential for inclusion in the manuscript itself but that enhance the report; 2) computer code needed to reproduce the major analyses; 3) nonproprietary questionnaires, survey forms, other data collection instruments, scripts, or experimental stimuli; and 4) qualitative response material. There is no specific limit on the length of the supplemental document, and it does not count against the manuscript’s page limit. Refer readers to the supplement at appropriate points in the text of the manuscript. See Supplementing Your Article with Online Material for more information.
• Reporting Checklist: If you have completed a reporting checklist (e.g., CONSORT, PRISMA, or STROBE), submit it as a Reporting Checklist file.

Use Microsoft Word (.doc) or LaTeX (.tex) to create documents for submission. If using LaTeX, submit a zip file that includes a .pdf version of each .tex file.

Manuscripts should adhere to the guidelines provided in the 7^th edition of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association. APA Style guidance is available online.

Classifications: Use this checklist to classify the manuscript’s area(s) of interest or specialization.

Suggested Reviewers: Enter the name, institution, email address, and qualifications of at least three potential reviewers.

Questionnaire: The questionnaire asks about 1) serving as a reviewer; 2) funding agencies that supported the submitted work; 3) the larger study or project, if any, on which the current study is based; and 4) potential conflicts of interest.

If your report is based on data from a larger study or project (e.g., an analysis based on a large epidemiological dataset or a secondary analysis of clinical trial data), use the questionnaire to explain the relationship between the current paper and the larger study or project, and briefly explain the current study’s novel or value-added scientific contribution relative to other papers from the same dataset. List any papers that were based on the larger study or dataset and that have been published, are under review, or are in press, about which the editors and reviewers of the current paper should be aware. Cite them in the manuscript as well if readers should be aware of them.

Manuscripts

Length: Regular articles are limited to 30 pages, meta-analyses to 35 pages, and brief reports to 12 pages. The page limit includes all parts of the manuscript, including the title page, abstract, text, references, tables, and figures. Use a sans serif font such as 11-point Calibri or 11-point Arial, or a serif font such as 12-point Times New Roman, and double-space the text. Authors may request permission to exceed the page limit, but the journal operates under a contractual page budget, so overages are allowed only when necessary. Please write succinctly and place nonessential materials in a supplement, not in the manuscript.

Title Page: The title page should adhere to APA Style and include an APA-style Author Note. The manuscript’s title should be no more than 12 words long, and it should not state an assertion or conclusion. The title should include "a randomized controlled trial," "a meta-analysis," "a systematic review," or "systematic review and meta-analysis," if appropriate.

APA-Style Author Notes include the following information:

• Paragraph 1 : Authors’ ORCID iDs if available. Authors will be asked to identify the contributions of all authors at submission using the Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT) . All authors should have reviewed and agreed to their individual contribution(s) before submission. Authors may claim credit for more than one role, and the same role can be attributed to more than one author.
• Paragraph 2: Changes, if any, in author affiliations that occurred after the study ended.
• Paragraph 3: Disclosures and acknowledgements, if any, including: a) Study preregistration information including registry name and record number, e.g., "Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT999999." b) links to data, materials, and code. c) Financial support including funding agencies and grant numbers. d) Disclosure of any real or potentially perceived conflicts of interest including financial interests or affiliations that might be seen as influencing the research. If there are no conflicts of interest, this should be clearly stated. e) Acknowledgements of nonfinancial assistance such as staff or student contributions to the research.
• Paragraph 4: Corresponding author’s contact information, including an email address.

Abstract: Empirical reports must include a structured abstract with < 250 words and these headings:

• Objective: Brief statement of the purpose or aims of the study.
• Methods: Essential information about the study design, procedures, and measures.
• Results: Primary findings; include sample size and primary statistical results, if possible.
• Conclusions: Main conclusions based on the primary findings.

Papers such as narrative reviews or invited commentaries for which a structured abstract would be inappropriate should include an unstructured manuscript with a maximum of 250 words.

The journal will provide a Spanish translation of abstracts for all papers accepted as of March 1, 2023. This abstract will be added in post-production after acceptance and will be included in the online (html) version and the end of the article in the PDF version

Keywords: List up to five keywords below the abstract. Use National Library of Medicine medical subject heading ( MeSH ) vocabulary or APA psychological index terms .

Body of the Manuscript: Empirical reports should include:

• a clear statement of the research question, hypothesis, specific aims, or purpose of the study;
• essential information about the methods even if a separate methods or protocol paper is cited;
• descriptive statistics to characterize the sample, the sample size, and the measures;
• a CONSORT-style participant flow diagram, if appropriate;
• disclosure of the study’s limitations; and
• conclusions that are consistent with the findings.

The methods section of reports of research involving human participants must provide information about institutional review board or ethics board approval, including the name(s) of the institution(s) that approved the study, or an explanation of why the study was exempt from approval and oversight. Informed consent and assent procedures should also be briefly described.

Reports should explain the significance or novel contribution of original research without overstating the study’s translational, clinical, or public health significance.

If the purpose of the work is to attempt to replicate or extend previous studies, this should be disclosed, and minor innovations or superficially novel features should not be overstated.
The statistical methods should adhere to the APA Task Force on Statistical Inference guidelines. Statistical results, tables, and figures should adhere to APA Style guidelines.

Areas of interest

Translational research

Health Psychology publishes work across the entire spectrum of translational research in health psychology and behavioral medicine, including observational, experimental, and interventional studies. Programmatic research is especially welcome. If the study is integral to an ongoing, well-focused program of research, its relationship to previous and planned work should be described.

When applicable, authors are encouraged to position their study within an established framework or model for translational research, intervention development or optimization, or implementation science, such as the ORBIT Model (Czajkowski et al., Health Psychology 2015;34(10):971-982).

Observational and experimental research

Health Psychology publishes many kinds of observational, epidemiological, and experimental studies. However, studies with the following characteristics are seldom accepted:

• studies with little or no direct relevance to physical health or medical illness
• studies with limited ecological validity or generalizability
• mediation analyses based on cross-sectional data
• small qualitative studies

Early-phase intervention research

Health psychology is an applied science that draws upon many areas of basic research. Translational and intervention optimization models such as ORBIT, the NIH Stage Model, or the Multiphase Optimization Strategy (MOST) encourage us to ground our health-related behavioral intervention research in basic social and behavioral science research, the science of behavior change, and in other areas of psychosocial, clinical, and public health research. These models also promote a programmatic approach to intervention development, optimization, testing, and implementation.

The journal welcomes basic research that is conducted to inform health-related behavioral intervention development or other clinical or public health applications of health psychology. We also welcome early-phase research on health-related behavioral interventions, such as intervention development, optimization, and dose-finding studies; proof-of-concept evaluations; and feasibility studies. However, these reports must meet certain criteria to be considered for publication.

• The study should be embedded in a translational or intervention optimization model and in programmatic line of research whose long-term goal concerns maintaining physical health, preventing medical illness, or improving significant medical or public health outcomes.
• The report should not claim that the study is definitive or that it has significant practice or policy implications; it should instead point to specific next steps in the line of research.
• It should not include severely underpowered statistical tests of efficacy hypotheses; see Freedland KE. Health Psychology 2020;39(10):851-862 for further information.

Small, early-phase studies must compete against larger and more definitive studies in the journal’s priority ranking system. This is especially challenging for small or preliminary studies that are conducted primarily to guide the investigator’s own work and that may be of limited interest to other researchers. Thus, early-phase research reports should highlight aspects of the study that would be informative for other investigators.

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs)

The journal welcomes reports based on randomized controlled trials of health-related behavioral interventions. However, secondary or exploratory analyses of RCT outcome data should not be submitted until the primary findings of the trial have been published. Manuscripts that do not include outcome data, such as analyses that are limited to baseline data, may be submitted before the primary findings have been published.

Meta-analyses and Meta-regression analyses

Meta-analyses and meta-regression analyses of research in health psychology and behavioral medicine are welcome. They must provide significant added value if other meta-analyses of the same area of research have already been published.

Psychometric studies

Research on questionnaires or other assessment instruments should be based on modern psychometric methods. A convincing case should be made for a new, modified, or translated measure, and it should be relevant to a large segment of the journal’s readership.

Methodological issues and advances

Health Psychology welcomes reviews and tutorials on the following methodological topics:

• Advanced statistical procedures that are applicable to multiple areas of health psychology or behavioral medicine research but that are underutilized.
• Standard statistical methods that are widely misunderstood, misused, or neglected in health psychology and behavioral medicine research.
• Nonstatistical methodological issues that affect the quality or impact of health psychology and behavioral medicine research.

Authors should 1) present advanced methods in a clear and accessible manner for readers who are not statistical experts; 2) provide guidance about the assumptions and utilization of statistical procedures, examples, and computer code; and 3) provide links to sample datasets if applicable.

Letters to the editor

Selected letters to the editor are published online, on the journal’s website. Submit letters to the editor by email to Katt Fambrough with a cover letter disclosing any potential conflicts of interest. If the letter is accepted, the target article’s authors may be invited to respond.

Transparency and Openness Promotion

Work submitted to Health Psychology should adhere to the Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) Guidelines. For empirical reports, include a brief "Transparency and Openness" subsection at the beginning of the methods section. This subsection should detail the efforts the authors have made to comply with the TOP guidelines; the purpose is to gather all required disclosures and links in one location to make it easier for readers, reviewers, and editors to find this information. This is an example of a brief transparency and openness statement for an RCT:

In this article, we report how we determined our sample size, all data exclusions, all manipulations, and all measures that were included in the study, and we follow the CONSORT guideline for reporting parallel group randomized trials. All data, analysis code, and research materials are available at [stable link to permanent repository]. Data were analyzed using R version 4.0.0 (R Core Team, 2020). The trial was pre-registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT99999999).

Empirical reports submitted to Health Psychology are required to meet certain TOP standards. Adherence to other TOP standards is optional but the manuscript must disclose the level of adherence. The list below summarizes these requirements; see the TOP guidelines for details.

• Citation Standards: Level 2, Required—All data, program code and other methods must be cited in the text and listed in the References section.
• Data Transparency: Level 1, Disclose—The article must disclose whether or not the materials are posted to a trusted repository. In both the Author Note and the Transparency and Openness subsection in the Method section, state whether the data are available, and if so, where to access them. The preferred method is to provide a link to a trusted repository. Trusted discipline-specific, institutional, and open research repositories are acceptable. See the OpenAIRE Guide for information and re3data.org help with finding repositories.
• Analytic Methods (Code) Transparency: Level 2, Required—Provide the computer code needed to reproduce the major analyses in a supplement or via a link to a trusted repository in the Transparency and Openness subsection in the Method section. Explain exceptions in the Statistical Analysis section.
• Research Materials Transparency: Level 2, Required—Provide key nonproprietary materials such as questionnaires or survey forms in a supplement or via a link to a trusted repository in the Transparency and Openness subsection in the Method section. Provide citations for proprietary materials. Explain exceptions in the Method section.
• Reporting Standards; Design and Analysis Transparency: Level 2, Required—Adhere to relevant Equator Network reporting guidelines, such as CONSORT for randomized trials or PRISMA for systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Submit a completed reporting guideline checklist as a Document for Reviewers and include a participant flow diagram in the manuscript. Adhere to the APA Journal Article Reporting Standards (JARS) for items that are not addressed in the Equator Network guidelines.
• Preregistration of Studies: Level 2, Required—State whether the study was preregistered in an established registry, and if so, provide the link or information needed to access the record. Randomized controlled trials must be pre­registered in clinicaltrials.gov or another established registry in the WHO Registry Network. Reports of RCTs that are unregistered or that were registered retrospectively may be rejected without peer review.
  • Study preregistration is defined as creation of time stamped, read-only documentation of study design and, if applicable, hypotheses, before the participants are enrolled.
  • Access to a masked version of the preregistered study should be available at submission via stable link or supplemental material.
  • Study design includes items such as experimental conditions, operationaliza­tion of variables, sampling plans, etc. For studies other than RCTs, a protocol or methods paper may be cited in lieu of study preregistration if it was published prior to the enrollment of study participants.
• Preregistration of Analysis Plans: Level 2, Required—State whether the statistical analysis plan was preregistered in a trusted repository or established registry such as clinicaltrials.gov, and if so, provide the link or information needed to access it. Documentation of the analysis plan must be time stamped, accessible, and read-only.
  • The analysis plan may include information about planned analytic strategies, specific planned models, statistical decision rules, assumption checks, etc. It may also identify analyses that are meant to be confirmatory tests of a priori hypotheses. The goal is to clearly differentiate between preplanned vs. post hoc (and perhaps data-dependent) analyses.
  • A priori analysis plans are defined as ones that are preregistered before the data are collected. Blinded ex post analyses are defined as ones that were not preregistered but that were planned before the relevant data were seen. Post hoc analyses are defined as ones that are conducted after the analyst or investigator has seen the data.
  • Access to a masked version of the preregistered analysis plan should be available at submission via stable link or supplemental material.
• Replication: Level 1, Disclose—The journal encourages submission of replication studies. Submissions should include "A Replication of XX Study" in the subtitle of the manuscript as well as in the abstract.

Equity, diversity, and inclusion statement

Health Psychology is strongly committed to advancing diversity in all areas including but not limited to age, socioeconomic background, race/ethnicity, culture, gender, sexual orientation, religion, language, abilities, and the intersection of multiple underserved identities. In this context, the editorial team strives for inclusive excellence; the belief that our mission to advance population health is facilitated by promoting diversity in who we are (representation), the scope of work, and how that work is achieved. Through these efforts we aim to create a more welcoming space to advance understanding of public health challenges, optimize the associated research efforts, harmonize research with the very communities we aim to benefit, and establish a sustainable pipeline of inclusion and representation for the journal’s future stewardship.

Please review the journal’s full EDI statement and a summary of the journal’s practices in support of equity, diversity, and inclusion.

Equity, diversity, and inclusion in Health Psychology

Health Psychology is committed to improving equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) in scientific research, in line with the APA Publishing EDI framework and APA’s trio of 2021 resolutions to address systemic racism in psychology.

The journal encourages submissions which extend beyond Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic (WEIRD) samples (Henrich, et al., 2010). The journal welcomes submissions which feature Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) and other historically marginalized sample populations. The journal particularly welcomes submissions which feature collaborative research models (e.g., community-based participatory research [CBPR]; see Collins, et al., 2018) and study designs that address heterogeneity within diverse samples. Studies focused exclusively on BIPOC and other historically excluded populations are also welcome.

To promote a more equitable research and publication process, Health Psychology has adopted the following standards for inclusive research reporting.

Author contribution 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, Health Psychology 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 must identify the contributions of all authors at initial submission according to the CRediT 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.

Authors can claim credit for more than one contributor role, and the same role can be attributed to more than one author. Not all roles will be applicable to a particular scholarly work.

Participant description, sample justification, and informed consent

Authors must include a detailed description of the study participants in the Method section of each empirical report, including (but not limited to) the following:

• age
• sex
• gender
• racial identity
• ethnicity
• nativity or immigration history
• socioeconomic status
• clinical diagnoses and comorbidities (as appropriate)
• any other relevant demographics (e.g., disability status; sexual orientation)

In both the abstract and in the discussion section of the manuscript, authors must discuss the diversity of their study samples and the generalizability of their findings (see also the constraints on generality section below).

Authors must 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).

The method section also must include a statement describing how informed consent was obtained from the participants (or their parents/guardians), including for secondary use of data if applicable, and indicate that the study was conducted in compliance with an appropriate Internal Review Board.

Reporting year(s) of data collection

Authors must disclose the year(s) of data collection in both the abstract and in the method section in order to appropriately contextualize the study.

Positionality statements

Authors are encouraged to include a positionality statement in the author note. Positionality statements are intended to address potential author bias by transparently reporting how the identities of the authors relate to the research/article topic and to the identity of the participants, as well as the extent to which those identities are represented in the scientific record. The statement should be included in the author note and expanded upon in the Discussion section. See this example from Jovanova, et al. (2022):

• Sample positionality statement: "Mindful that our identities can influence our approach to science (Roberts, et al. 2020), the authors wish to provide the reader with information about our backgrounds. With respect to gender, when the manuscript was drafted, four authors self-identified as women and four authors as men. With respect to race, six authors self-identified as white, one as South Asian and one as East Asian."

For more guidance on writing positionality statements, see Roberts, et al. (2020) and Hamby (2018).

Reflexivity

The journal welcomes submissions that proactively challenge racism and other forms of oppression. In line with the APA Guidelines on Race and Ethnicity in Psychology (2019), authors are encouraged to include reflexive statements in the Discussion section, addressing the following questions.

• What are the policy implications of these findings?
• Could this research be misinterpreted or misused to negatively affect underrepresented groups? Does the research have the potential to cause harm to vulnerable groups? If so, how can this be addressed and mitigated?
• Does the design or framing of this research reinforce negative stereotypes about marginalized populations?
• What roles do the researcher(s)’ values and worldview play in the selection of this topic or design of the study?

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, including their location and any limitations on use. If they cannot be made available, authors must state the legal or ethical reasons why they are not available. 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. 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" in the Methods section, specify whether and where the data and material will be available or note the legal or ethical reasons for not doing so. For submissions with quantitative or simulation analytic methods, state whether the study analysis code is posted to a trusted repository, and, if so, how to access it (or the legal or ethical reason why it is not available).

For example:

• All data have been made publicly available at the [repository name] and can be accessed at [persistent URL or DOI].
• Materials and analysis code for this study are not available.
• The code behind this analysis/simulation has been made publicly available at the [repository name] and can be accessed at [persistent URL or DOI].

Constraints on generality

In a subsection of the discussion titled "Constraints on generality," authors are encouraged to include a detailed discussion of the limits on generality (see Simons, Shoda, & Lindsay, 2017). In this section, authors should detail grounds for concluding why the results are may or may not be specific to the characteristics of the participants. They should address limits on generality not only for participants but for materials, procedures, and context. Authors should also specify which methods they think could be varied without affecting the result and which should remain constant.

Public significance statements

Authors submitting manuscripts to Health Psychology must include a brief statement (2-3 sentences/70 words max) summarizing the public health significance/implications of their work. For example, this statement may describe how the current research advances some fundamental knowledge of health and disease, vulnerable populations, sheds light on hypothesized mechanisms, or contributes knowledge that may enhance prevention and health, contribute to illness management, or aid coping and recovery. Hyperlinks and URLs are not permitted in this description. The statement should be included within the manuscript on the abstract/keywords page and should be written clearly for the educated public.

Peer review policy

All manuscripts submitted to Health Psychology undergo an initial editorial evaluation which may result in rejection without external peer review.

Manuscripts that are sent out for external peer review receive single-masked reviews. This means that the reviewers are anonymous, but the authors are not.

The manuscript’s title page should include the name and affiliation of every author. Identifying information should not be masked on the title page, in the Abstract or in body of the manuscript, or in citations or references. Masked manuscripts may be returned to the authors without review.

Technical specifications

Tables

Tables should adhere to APA Style. Use Word’s Insert Table function to create tables, and do not insert tabs or extra spaces to align columns as this will create problems when the table is typeset.

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ドル for one figure
• An additional 600ドル for the second figure
• An additional 450ドル for each subsequent figure

Equations and computer code

Use Times or Symbol font or Microsoft’s Equation Editor for equations or formulas.

If possible, provide executable source code in an online-only supplement, not in the manuscript itself. If it is essential to include code in the manuscript, submit a separate file with the code exactly as you want it to appear. Use 8-point Courier New font and do not add any extra indents, line spaces, or line breaks. Segments >40 characters will be printed as images; shorter snippets of code will be typeset in Courier New and run with the rest of the text.

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. http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR20240.v8

Ethical Principles

It is a violation of APA Ethical Principles to publish "as original data, data that have been previously published" (Standard 8.13).

APA Ethical Principles also state 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 make their data available if asked during the editorial process and for at least five years after the date of publication.

If the manuscript is accepted, the corresponding author is required to sign and submit a Certification of Compliance with APA Ethical Principles (PDF, 26KB).

See the APA Ethical Principles and Code of Conduct for further guidance.

Publication policies and forms

For full details on publication policies, including use of Artificial Intelligence tools, please see APA Publishing Policies.

APA policy prohibits authors from submitting the same manuscript for concurrent consideration by two or more publications.

See APA’s Internet Posting Guidelines for information about posting copies of manuscripts prior to publication in Health Psychology.

APA requires all authors of accepted manuscripts to complete a form that lists any possible conflicts of interest in the conduct and reporting of research, such as financial interests in a test or procedure, or funding by pharmaceutical companies for drug research.

• Download Full Disclosure of Interests Form (PDF, 41KB)

All necessary permissions to reproduce in print and electronic form any copyrighted work, including test materials, photographs, and other graphic images (including those used as stimuli in experiments) must be provided for accepted papers. On advice of counsel, APA may decline to publish any image whose copyright status is unknown.

• Download Permissions Alert Form (PDF, 13KB)

The APA Journals Publishing Resource Center provides further guidance for authors and reviewers.

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.

Editorial leadership biographies and research specializations

Editor-in-chief

John M. Ruiz, PhD
University of Arizona, United States

Senior associate editor

Eli Puterman, PhD
The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada

Associate editors

Diana A. Chirinos, PhD
Northwestern University, United States

Jenny M. Cundiff, PhD
University of Alabama, United States

Lori A. Francis, PhD
Penn State University, United States

Giselle K. Perez
Mass General Hospital/Harvard Medical School, United States

Aric A. Prather, PhD
University of California, San Francisco, United States

A. Janet Tomiyama, PhD
University of California, Los Angeles, United States

Bert N. Uchino, PhD
University of Utah, United States

Anna C. Whittaker, PhD
University of Stirling, United Kingdom

Consulting editors

Chul Ahn, PhD
University of Texas Southwestern, United States

Mustafa al'Absi, PhD
University of Minnesota, United States

Norman Anderson, PhD
Florida State University, United States

Bernard Appiah, PhD
Syracuse University, United States

Elva Arredondo, PhD
San Diego State University, United States

Simon Bacon, PhD
Concordia University, Canada

Austin S. Baldwin, PhD
Southern Methodist University, United States

Kelly Glazer Baron, PhD
University of Utah, United States

Gary Bennett, PhD
Duke University, United States

Wendy Birmingham, PhD
Brigham Young University, United States

Julia K. Boehm, PhD
Chapman University, United States

Kyle Bourassa, PhD
Duke University, United States

Lisa Bowleg, PhD
The George Washington University, United States

Elizabeth Brondolo, PhD
St. John's University, United States

Matthew Burg, PhD
Yale University, United States

Jessica L. Burris, PhD
University of Kentucky, United States

Belinda Campos, PhD
University of California, Irvine, United States

Lisa Carter-Bawa, PhD, APRN
Center for Discovery and Innovation at Hackensack Meridian Health, United States

David Chae, ScD
Tulane University, United States

Edith Chen, PhD
Northwestern University, United States

Irma Corral, PhD
East Carolina University, United States

Matthew Cribbet, PhD
University of Alabama, United States

Jenny M. Cundiff, PhD
University of Alabama, United States

Kimberly D'Anna-Hernandez, PhD
Marquette University, United States

Lisa Diamond, PhD
University of Utah, United States

Blaine Ditto, PhD
McGill University, Canada

Tessa L. Dover, PhD
Portland State University, United States

Christine Dunkel Schetter, PhD
University of California, Los Angeles, United States

Genevieve Dunton, PhD
University of South California, United States

Elissa Epel, PhD
University of California, San Francisco, United States

Paul Estabrooks, PhD
University of Utah, United States

Carolyn Y. Fang, PhD
Fox Chase Cancer Center, United States

Melissa Flores, PhD
University of Arizona, United States

James J. García, PhD
California State Fullerton, United States

Peter J. Gianaros, PhD
University of Pittsburgh, United States

Martin S. Hagger, PhD
University of California, Merced, United States and University of Jyväskylä, Finland

Chanita Hughes-Halbert, PhD
USC Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, United States

Heidi A. Hamann, PhD
University of Arizona, United States

Mark L. Hatzenbuehler, PhD
Harvard University, United States

Rashelle Hayes, PhD
VCU Health, United States

Jonathan Helm, PhD
San Diego State University, United States

Rosalba Hernandez, PhD
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, United States

Kisha Holden, PhD
Morehouse School of Medicine, United States

David Huebner, PhD
The George Washington University, United States

Tristen K. Inagaki, PhD
San Diego State University, United States

Michael R. Irwin, MD
University of California, United States

Yanping Jiang
Rutgers University, United States

Charles R. Jonassaint, PhD
University of Pittsburgh, United States

Nataria Tennille Joseph, PhD
Pepperdine University, United States

Robert-Paul Juster, PhD
University of Montreal, Canada

Robert M. Kaplan, PhD
Stanford University, United States

Gaston Kapuku, PhD
Augusta University, United States

Tasneem Khambaty, PhD
University of Maryland, Baltimore County, United States

Shin Ye Kim, PhD
Texas Tech University, United States

Youngmee Kim, PhD
University of Miami, United States

Nina Knoll, PhD
Freie Universität Berlin, Germany

Richard D. Lane, MD, PhD
University of Arizona, United States

Simon Craddock Lee, PhD
The University of Kansas, United States

Tené T. Lewis, PhD
Emory University, United States

Maria Magdalena Llabre, PhD
University of Miami, United States

Travis I. Lovejoy PhD, MPH
Oregon Health & Science University, United States

Carissa A. Low, PhD
University of Pittsburgh, United States

Mark A. Lumley, PhD
Wayne State University, United States

Lesley Lutes, PhD
The University of British Columbia Okanagan, Canada

David X. Marquez, PhD
University of Illinois Chicago, United States

Becky Marquez, PhD
University of California, San Diego, United States

David G. Marrero, PhD
University of Arizona, United States

Anna Marsland, PhD
University of Pittsburgh, United States

Kevin S. Masters, PhD
University of Colorado Denver, United States

Jessica McCurley, PhD
San Diego State University, United States

Marcellus M. Merritt, PhD
University of Wisconsin Milwaukee, United States

Gregory E. Miller, PhD
Northwestern University, United States

Matthew F. Muldoon
University of Pittsburgh, United States

Enrique W. Neblett, Jr., PhD
University of Michigan, United States

Rory O' Connor, PhD
University of Glasgow, United Kingdom

KayLoni L. Olson, PhD
Brown Medical School, United States

Anthony D. Ong, PhD
Cornell University, United States

Adam O’Riordan
University of Texas, San Antonio, United States

Manuel S. Ortiz, PhD
Universidad de La Frontera, Chile

Gozde Ozakinci, PhD
University of Stirling, Scotland

Martin Picard, PhD
Columbia University, United States

Rachel Povey, PhD
Staffordshire University, United Kingdom

Wizdom Powell, PhD
UConn Health, United States

Tiffany M. Powell-Wiley, MD, MPH
National Institutes of Health, United States

Ravi Prasad, PhD
University of California-Davis School of Medicine, United States

Rebecca G. Reed, PhD
University of Pittsburgh, United States

Tracey A. Revenson, PhD
Hunter College and the Graduate Center, City University of New York, United States

Jamie Rhudy, PhD
The University of Tulsa, United States

Christine M. Rini, PhD
Northwestern University, United States

Theodore F. Robles, PhD
University of California, Los Angeles, United States

Carlos J. Rodriguez, MD, MPH
Albert Einstein College of Medicine, United States

Andrea Romero, PhD
University of Arizona, United States

Joseph E. Schwartz, PhD
Columbia University, United States

Elizabeth K. Seng, PhD
Yeshiva University, United States

Jonathan Shaffer, PhD
University of Colorado Denver, United States

George Slavich, PhD
University of California, United States

Timothy W. Smith, PhD
University of Utah, United States

Kim G. Smolderen, PhD
Yale University, United States

Anna V. Song, PhD
University of California, Merced, United States

Michael V. Stanton, PhD
California State University, East Bay, United States

Annette L. Stanton, PhD
University of California, United States

Jesse C. Stewart, PhD
Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, United States

Christian Swann, PhD
Southern Cross University, Australia

Vivien Swanson, PhD
University of Stirling, Scotland

Julian Thayer, PhD
University of California, Irvine, United States

Rebecca C. Thurston, PhD
University of Pittsburgh, United States

Lianne Tomfohr-Madsen, PhD
The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada

Ranak Trivedi, PhD
Stanford University, United States

Zina Trost, PhD
Virginia Commonwealth University, United States

Claudia Trudel-Fitzgerald, PhD
Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, Canada

William Tsai, PhD
New York University, United States

Julie M. Turner-Cobb, PhD
Bournemouth University, United Kingdom

Vanessa V. Volpe
North Carolina State University, United States

Shari Waldstein, PhD
University of Maryland, Baltimore County, United States

Baldwin M. Way, PhD
The Ohio State University

Kristi E. White, PhD, ABPP
University of Minnesota, United States

Paula G. Williams, PhD
The University of Utah, United States

DeWayen P. Williams, PhD
University of California, Irvine, United States

Matthew J. Zawadzki, PhD
University of California, Merced, United States

Samuele Zilioli
Wayne State University, United States

Abstracting and indexing services providing coverage of Health Psychology^®

• Abstracts in Anthropology
• Academic OneFile
• Advanced Placement Psychology Collection
• ASSIA: Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts
• Cabell's Directory of Publishing Opportunities in Psychology
• CINAHL
• CINAHL Complete
• CINAHL Plus
• Current Abstracts
• Current Contents: Clinical Medicine
• Current Contents: Social & Behavioral Sciences
• Educational Research Abstracts Online
• Embase (Excerpta Medica)
• Environmental Science and Pollution Management
• ERIH (European Reference Index for the Humanities and Social Sciences)
• Expanded Academic ASAP
• Family & Society Studies Worldwide
• General OneFile
• Health & Safety Science Abstracts
• Health & Wellness Resource Center and Alternative Health Module
• Health Reference Center Academic
• InfoTrac Custom
• Journal Citations Report: Social Sciences Edition
• MEDLINE
• Mosby's Nursing Consult
• Mosby's Yearbook
• Multicultural Education Abstracts
• Nursing and Allied Health Collection
• Nursing Resource Center
• OCLC
• OmniFile Full Text Mega
• PASCAL
• Psychology Collection
• PsycInfo
• PsycLine
• PubMed
• Russian Academy of Sciences Bibliography
• SafetyLit
• Science Citation Index Expanded
• SCOPUS
• Social Sciences Abstracts
• Social Sciences Citation Index
• Social Sciences Full Text
• Social Work Abstracts
• Studies on Women and Gender Abstracts
• Supplemental Index
• TOC Premier
• Women's Studies International

• Social Influences on Physical Health:

  Health Psychology special issue on how social factors impact health and guide policy and interventions.

• Sexual and Gender Minority Health Inequities:

  Health Psychology special issue on current challenges and knowledge gaps to SGM health research.

• Advancing Adolescent Health through the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study:

  Special issue of the APA journal Health Psychology, Vol. 42, No. 12, December 2023. The empirical reports in this special issue of Health Psychology showcase the work of a diverse array of accomplished early-stage investigators who are members of the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study consortium and who are drawn from the community of female and underrepresented scientists.

• Vaccine Hesitancy and Refusal:

  Special issue of APA's journal Health Psychology, Vol. 42, No. 8, August 2023. This special issue examines various aspects of vaccine hesitancy using a health psychology lens.

• Cardiovascular Behavioral Medicine:

  Special issue of APA's journal Health Psychology, Vol. 41, No. 10, October 2022. This special issue reflects where cardiovascular behavioral medicine has been, where the field needs to go, and how we might get there.

• From Ideas to Efficacy in Health Psychology:

  Special issue of APA's Health Psychology, Vol. 40, No. 12, December 2021. This special issue presents novel research that advances translational behavioral science, focusing primarily on the early phases of behavioral translation that are not as well recognized as later-phase translational science.

• The Science of Behavior Change:

  Special issue of the APA journal Health Psychology, Vol. 39, No. 9, September 2020. This special issue showcases how investigators working in different areas of health behavior change are utilizing early phase studies to advance intervention development.

• Multimorbidity in Health Psychology and Behavioral Medicine Research:

  Special issue of the APA journal Health Psychology, Vol. 38, No. 9, September 2019. Topics include relevance, measurement, mechanisms, and interventions for multimorbidity.

• PROMIS^® Methods and Applications in Health Psychology and Behavioral Medicine Research:

  Special issue of the APA journal Health Psychology, Vol. 38, No. 5, May 2019. The issue features outcomes research and applications of universal health-related quality of life measures produced under the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System initiative.

• Implicit Processes in Health Psychology:

  Special issue of the APA journal Health Psychology, Vol. 35, No. 8, August 2016. Includes articles about tobacco use, eating behavior, physical activity, alcohol consumption, condom use, and the impact of implicit prejudice on physical and mental health.

• Disparities in Cardiovascular Health:

  Special issue of the APA journal Health Psychology, Vol. 35, No. 4, April 2016. The papers offer windows into cutting-edge themes, methodologies, challenges, and future directions in understanding psychosocial factors and sociocultural sequelae as they relate to cardiovascular health disparities.

• eHealth/mHealth:

  Special issue of the APA journal Health Psychology, Vol. 34, No. S, December 2015. The issue includes 11 papers that address the need for more rigorous methodology, valid assessment, innovative interventions, and increased access to evidence-based programs and interventions.

• Qualitative Research in Health Psychology:

  Special issue of the APA journal Health Psychology, Vol. 34, No. 4, April 2015. The issue showcases a range of qualitative research projects conducted by health psychologists with a view to promoting greater uptake and development of qualitative research methods in the field.

• The Role of Social Networks in Adult Health:

  Special issue of the APA journal Health Psychology, Vol. 33, No. 6, June 2014. The studies used diverse measures to quantify social relationships, ranging from network size or composition and social integration to availability of a confidante and quality of social interactions.

• Health Psychology Meets Behavioral Economics:

  Special issue of the APA journal Health Psychology, Vol. 32, No. 9, September 2013. The issue was designed to attract both conceptual and empirical articles, to present a wide spectrum of thinking and methods, and to illustrate how behavioral economics might address today's pressing health problems.

• Theoretical Innovations in Social and Personality Psychology and Implications for Health:

  Special issue of the APA journal Health Psychology, Vol. 32, No. 5, May 2013. Articles highlight major areas of innovation in recent social/personality psychology that hold promise for synergistic integration with health psychology and related fields in the pursuit of adequate health promotion, health care, and population health.

• Men's Health:

  Special issue of the APA journal Health Psychology, Vol. 32, No. 1, January 2013. The first section focuses on public health issues, including physical exercise, alcohol consumption, and help-seeking. The second section covers illness-related phenomena, including male-specific cancers, sports-induced disability, and male sterilization.

• Tobacco and Health Psychology:

  Special issue of the APA journal Health Psychology, Vol. 27, No. 3 (Suppl.), May 2008. Articles discuss psychosocial processes underlying smoking; modern science and tobacco research; initiation and maintenance of smoking cessation; depressive symptoms and cigarette smoking; functional beliefs about smoking and quitting activity; processing of anti-smoking messages; and effect of regulatory focus on performance in smoking and weight loss interventions.

• Mediation and Moderation:

  Special issue of the APA journal Health Psychology, Vol. 27, No. 2 (Supplement), March 2008. Includes articles about mediation and moderation of psychological factors in patients with diabetes; chronic pain; cancer caregivers; and high blood pressure, as well as adolescent health; physical activity; and sexual risk reduction in women.

• Diet, Exercise, and Diabetes Control:

  Special issue of the APA journal Health Psychology, Vol. 27, No. 1, Suppl, January 2008. It was developed to highlight some of the fundamental issues from a biological, cognitive, social, and environmental perspective for understanding the impact of intervention effects on behavior change processes and ultimate health.

• Basic and Applied Decision Making in Cancer Control:

  Special issue of the APA journal Health Psychology, Vol. 24, No. 4, July 2005. Includes articles about decision making strategies; linking decision making research and cancer prevention and treatment; communication models in shared decision making; regret; coping; and advanced directives and end-of-life decisions.

Transparency and Openness Promotion

Work submitted to Health Psychology should adhere to the Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) Guidelines. For empirical reports, include a brief Transparency and Openness subsection at the beginning of the Methods section. The purpose is to gather all required disclosures and links in one location to make it easier for readers, reviewers, and editors to find this information. This is an example of a brief transparency and openness statement for an RCT:

In this article, we report how we determined our sample size, all data exclusions, all manipulations, and all measures that were included in the study, and we follow the CONSORT guideline for reporting parallel group randomized trials. All data, analysis code, and research materials are available at [stable link to repository]. Data were analyzed using R version 4.0.0 (R Core Team, 2020). The trial was pre-registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT99999999).

Empirical reports submitted to Health Psychology are required to meet certain TOP standards. Adherence to other TOP standards is optional but the manuscript must disclose the level of adherence. The list below summarizes these requirements; see the TOP guidelines for details.

• Citation Standards: Level 2, Required—All data, program code, and other methods developed by others must be cited in the text and listed in the References section.
• Data Transparency: Level 1, Disclose—In the Transparency and Openness subsection in the Method section, state whether the data are posted to a trusted repository, and if so, how to access them. Trusted discipline-specific, institutional, and open research repositories are acceptable. See the OpenAIRE Guide for information and re3data.org help with finding repositories.
• Analytic Methods (Code) Transparency: Level 2, Required—Provide the computer code needed to reproduce the major analyses in a supplement or via a link to a trusted repository in the Transparency and Openness subsection in the Method section. Explain exceptions in the Statistical Analysis section.
• Research Materials Transparency: Level 2, Required—Provide key nonproprietary materials such as questionnaires or survey forms in a supplement or via a link to a trusted repository in the Transparency and Openness subsection in the Method section. Provide citations for proprietary materials. Explain exceptions in the Method section.
• Reporting Standards; Design and Analysis Transparency: Level 2, Required—Adhere to relevant Equator Network reporting guidelines, such as CONSORT for randomized trials or PRISMA for systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Submit a completed reporting guideline checklist as a Document for Reviewers and include a participant flow diagram in the manuscript. Adhere to the APA Journal Article Reporting Standards (JARS) for items that are not addressed in the Equator Network guidelines.
• Preregistration of Studies: Level 2, Required—State whether the study was preregistered in an established registry, and if so, provide the link or information needed to access the record. Randomized controlled trials must be pre­registered in clinicaltrials.gov or another established registry. Reports of RCTs that are unregistered or that were registered retrospectively may be rejected without peer review.
  • Study preregistration is defined as creation of time stamped, read-only documentation of study design and, if applicable, hypotheses, before the participants are enrolled.
  • Access to a masked version of the preregistered study should be available at submission via stable link or supplemental material.
  • Study design includes items such as experimental conditions, operationaliza­tion of variables, sampling plans, etc. For studies other than RCTs, a protocol or methods paper may be cited in lieu of study preregistration if it was published prior to the enrollment of study participants.
• Preregistration of Analysis Plans: Level 2, Required—State whether the statistical analysis plan was preregistered in a trusted repository or established registry such as clinicaltrials.gov, and if so, provide the link or information needed to access it. Documentation of the analysis plan must be time stamped, accessible, and read-only.
  • The analysis plan may include information about planned analytic strategies, specific planned models, statistical decision rules, assumption checks, etc. It may also identify analyses that are meant to be confirmatory tests of a priori hypotheses. The goal is to clearly differentiate between preplanned vs. post hoc (and perhaps data-dependent) analyses.
  • A priori analysis plans are defined as ones that are preregistered before the data are collected. Blinded ex post analyses are defined as ones that were not preregistered but that were planned before the relevant data were seen. Post hoc analyses are defined as ones that are conducted after the analyst or investigator has seen the data.
  • Access to a masked version of the preregistered analysis plan should be available at submission via stable link or supplemental material.
• Replication: Level 1, Disclose—The journal encourages submission of replication studies.

Journal equity, diversity, and inclusion statement

Health Psychology is strongly committed to advancing diversity in all areas including but not limited to age, socioeconomic background, race/ethnicity, culture, gender, sexual orientation, religion, language, abilities, and the intersection of multiple underserved identities. In this context, the editorial team strives for inclusive excellence; the belief that our mission to advance population health is facilitated by promoting diversity in who we are (representation), the scope of work, and how that work is achieved. Through these efforts we aim to create a more welcoming space to advance understanding of public health challenges, optimize the associated research efforts, harmonize research with the very communities we aim to benefit, and establish a sustainable pipeline of inclusion and representation for the journal’s future stewardship.

Representation

Diversity in representation is central to perceptions of affiliation, fairness, and receptivity. It is also a critical facilitator of how we understand population health priorities, the types of research questions asked, the way those questions are approached, and how findings are disseminated to maximize impact. The new editorial team of Health Psychology has prioritized representation of diverse identities through action including but not limited to the following:

• Selection of a highly diverse, all-star team of experts in key domains. The 11-member executive team of the Editor-In-Chief (EIC) and Associate Editors (AEs) includes 6 women, 6 scholars of color, 2 international scholars, and members identifying as sexual and gender minorities (SGM). All have a demonstrated record in health equity.
• To foster the goal of representation, the EIC and AE members provide their photos, pronouns, and bios with identity on the journal webpage which can be found here: 2023–28 Health Psychology editorial team.
• A new Consulting Editor (CE) team was assembled with consideration of areas of expertise and inclusivity to meet the goals of peer review for the revised journal mission encompassing population health (see below). This team of over 100 scholars includes a range of disciplines from psychology, medicine, public health, epidemiology, and anthropology with expertise in health psychology, specific conditions, key populations, health policy, and a variety of methods, approaches, and frameworks. Approximately 50% of the team identifies as scholars of color/people of the global majority with nearly two thirds identifying with a range of underrepresented identities.
• Like the EIC and AEs, CE members will be invited to share their photos, pronouns, and bios with identity on the journal webpage in the spirit of fostering perceptions of representation. This is a work in progress and will be updated by early January 2023.
• Finally, the editorial team encourages all reviewers and authors to complete the new APA demographic survey so we can assess who we are and the degree to which our efforts are having an impact. Advancing inclusivity is the responsibility of all and this action is critical to supporting future efforts.

Contemporary inclusive mission

The mission of Health Psychology reflects its values for inclusive excellence and is consistent with APA’s recent ratification of a population health approach to address critical issues in society (Psychology’s Role in Advancing Population Health). Health Psychology’s mission statement reads in part,

"Adhering to the highest standards of peer-review, the journal’s mission is to advance basic to translational science, policy, and practice to significantly impact population health. The journal actively encourages submissions that address psychological, behavioral, biobehavioral and sociocultural dimensions of the diversity of human experience, and which reflect a strong commitment to inclusive excellence to facilitate the goal of optimal health for all."

The editorial team’s intent is to maintain the journals status as the flagship journal for the field and expand its impact as a premier scientific journal by drawing a more representative science. The expectation is that the population health perspective will be infused throughout the journal’s efforts from its editors to authors to content and readership.

Actions and policies

To achieve the scientific aims of inclusivity, the editorial team is undertaking a number of actions and policies. These include but are not limited to the following:

Actions:

• use of commentaries and special issues to highlight population science issues
• Spanish translations of all abstracts
• openness to community and stakeholder models
• changing journal cover art each issue to highlight topics including issues of diversity, inclusivity, etc.

Policies:

• required use of bias-free language
• mandatory reporting of SES for samples or an indication of why that data is not reported
• required impact statements
• required sample descriptions and justifications to ensure diversity and clearly communicate reasons for exceptions

Access:

• Access to knowledge is a critical equity issue. Health Psychology recognizes the challenge of accessing its content within the APA journal publishing structure and the knowledge disparities this may create and sustain. The journal team is working with the publishers to identify ways to improve access including participation in the Editor’s Choice program and use of various free-to-read mechanisms.

Pathways to improving the pipeline

The editorial team is committed to establishing a robust pipeline of inclusivity in its peer review and editorial ranks. Two specific examples are:

• Mentored reviewing: The journal strongly supports the development, training, and mentoring of student/trainees in the peer review process. We are working with APA to identify ways to ensure credit for both the mentor and mentee including in ORCID and in the annual publication of reviewer names in the journal. The editorial team will also hold virtual trainings to facilitate reviewer basics and skill development and optimize the overall peer review process.

• Engagement in APA’s Editorial Fellowship Program : This program is aimed at early- to mid-career scholars from historically excluded groups. Fellows will sere a 12-month term beginning. Health Psychology will seek applications for up to five (5) fellows annually. IMPORTANT: These are mentored positions; Fellows will not be used to offset the workload of the editorial team. Health Psychology AE fellows will receive the following:
  • paired mentoring with an AE specializing in their area of expertise or with broad experience in health psychology/behavioral medicine
  • training on how the review process works, how to triage papers, how to choose reviewers, how to integrate reviews towards an editorial decision, and how to communicate with authors
  • monthly meetings with the EIC to discuss the broader editorship of the journal and developing and implementing strategic aims such as pursuit of commentaries, developing special issues, recruiting reviewers, and identifying emerging topics
  • credit on the journal masthead
  • opportunities for letters of support for promotion or other career-related advances
  • a 1000ドル honorarium

Inclusive study designs

• Collaborative research models
• 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)
• Reflexivity (recommended)
• Positionality statements (recommended)
• Data sharing and data availability statements (required)
• Impact statements (required)
• Year(s) of data collection (required)
• Participant sample descriptions (required)
• Sample justifications (required)
• Constraints on Generality (COG) statements (recommended)

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

Pathways to authorship and editorship

Editorial fellowships

Editorial fellowships help early-career psychologists gain firsthand experience in scholarly publishing and editorial leadership roles. This journal offers an editorial fellowship program for early-career psychologists from historically excluded communities.

Reviewer mentorship program

This journal encourages reviewers to submit co-reviews with their students and trainees. The journal likewise offers a formal reviewer mentorship program where graduate students and postdoctoral fellows from historically excluded groups are matched with a senior reviewer to produce an integrated review.

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.

Announcements

• APA endorses the Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) Guidelines
• Call for editorial fellowship nominations
• Guidelines for reviewers
• Letters to the editor

Editorials

• April 2021: Health Psychology adopts Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) Guidelines

From APA Journals Article Spotlight^®

• Do top-grossing American movies portray healthy and unhealthy foods differently? A systematic analysis of food in film
• Too much coronavirus media exposure may be bad for your health
• Changing our behavior to prevent chronic diseases: Behavioral medicine’s biggest challenge
• Setting standards for economic analyses for behavioral interventions