When a manuscript arrives (both by conventional mail and in electronic form, by e-mail) in the BASP editorial office, it is assigned a sequential log number. This is the number that we use to track the manuscript throughout the review and publication process. Authors should remember to include this number in any correspondence about their manuscripts; all of our filing is with reference to these numbers. After log-in, the Editor reads the paper, evaluating it in terms of basic methodological soundness and conceptual merit and fit for the mission of the journal. Papers that do not pass this initial screening are rejected without further review. The Editor then decides whether to serve as Action Editor for a manuscript or sends the paper out to one of the Associate Editors (Keith Markman, Ohio University; Brad Sagarin, Northern Illinois University) for processing and a decision.

When a paper is next sent out for further evaluation, by an Editorial Consultant, these reviewers are selected from among the members of the editorial board and additional experts who serve as reviewers on an ad hoc basis. They are sent a covering letter, an instruction sheet, and a rating sheet along with the manuscript (all are sent electronically). The written reviews and the Editor's own evaluation of the paper are used to reach a final decision about publication. Accepted papers present a strong theoretical justification for the research, clearly stated and logically derived hypotheses, appropriate methods and statistical analyses, and a discussion of the results that makes clear the conceptual and applied merit of the work. When a paper is recommended for publication, it almost always is contingent on revision that addresses important issues raised by the reviewers and the Editor or Associate Editor. After a manuscript receives final acceptance, paper and electronic copies are sent to the Production Editor at Taylor & Francis, LLC to prepare the manuscript for publication. Authors eventually receive page proofs that they must carefully examine for errors. Then it is on to the printer and eventually the mailboxes of the scientific community.

Authors submitting manuscripts to BASP can check the progress of their manuscripts themselves on this web site and, if useful, inquire about their papers electronically (basp@osu.edu).

I am writing to ask for your help in reviewing a manuscript submitted to Basic and Applied Social Psychology. 

I work hard to identify reviewers who I believe would find the work of interest and who have expertise that is clearly on target for the paper.

I have attached the manuscript to this e-mail, and hope that you will share your time and expertise by providing an evaluation of its suitability for publication.  If you can review this paper, I would need your review within about a month.

Please let me know whether you can do the review by replying to this message.  If you are able to do it, I will sent you additional reviewer guidelines.  If you are unable to do the review, a quick reply enables me to try to identify another suitable reviewer quickly and helps to ensure prompt editorial decisions.

          The review process would grind to a halt without the gracious efforts of experts like you. I know that completing a careful review is not a trivial addition to your schedule. I truly appreciate your help.

Sincerely,


Robert M. Arkin

Instructions to Reviewers

As you may know, Basic and Applied Social Psychology publishes basic research in social psychology that can be applied to important social problems as well as direct applications of social psychological theory. We look to publish papers that are provocative and bring new perspectives to important social issues. Contributions to BASP are typically empirical reports, but we also consider theoretical, methodological, and review papers that address issues central to the application of theoretical social psychology. We seek papers that present a strong conceptual justification for the research, have clearly stated and carefully derived hypotheses, report appropriate methods and statistical analyses, and clearly discuss the conceptual and applied merits of the work. Your willingness to help us evaluate this paper along these dimensions is truly appreciated. Following are a few simple guidelines we would like you to follow:

Please return your evaluation within one month of your receipt of the electronic version of the manuscript. In your e-mail you can simply list, at the end of your comments, the items (A through F) and ratings (Numbers 1 through 5) along with the percentile ranking corresponding to the judgments requested on the rating form.

If you prefer, you may use the Rating Form, which appears below, to enter your ratings and then return as an attachment.

The Rating Form will not be shown to the authors. You may also include in your e-mail any additional communication to the Editor that you do not want passed on to the authors.

Please provide the usual detailed comments about the suitability of this paper for publication.

Please by constructive in your comments to the authors. Try to explain clearly the basis for your criticisms and concerns. Because a revision and resubmission may be encouraged, please be specific about the changes that you think are necessary to remedy the problems that you identify. Regardless of the publication decision, the authors can benefit greatly from your wisdom and willingness to share it.

Please indicate a publication recommendation on the rating form. Reviewers are often selected because they have different areas of expertise relevant to the same paper. It is not unusual for them to disagree about publication because they may be approaching the paper from quite different perspectives. The Editor must take these multiple views into account along with his own evalution in rendering a decision about publication. In addition, the Editor must consider the page limits for the journal and so cannot publish all research that is merely technically competent. Authors sometimes have the misperception that editorial decisions are mere vote counts and so they get upset when the decision goes against popular sentiment. That problem can be avoided by indicating your opinion about publication only on the rating sheet.

Your identity will be kept anonymous unless you desire to reveal it.  Don't put any identifying information in your review inself, unless you with to reveal your identity to the authors.

This paper is a confidential communication. You should not show it to others, cite its content, or use it to further your own or others' work without permission. When you have finished with your evaluation, please destroy the paper and delete the file to protect its confidentiality.  If the paper is accepted for publication, you may request a preprint from the authors.

Thanks again for your help. I truly appreciate it. If you have comments or suggestions that you think would improve the review process at Basic and Applied Social Psychology, please let me know.

Robert M. Arkin, Editor
Basic and Applied Social Psychology
Department of Psychology
The Ohio State University
100a Lazenby Hall

1835 Neil Avenue Mall
Columbus, OH 43210-1287

Editorial Associate: Ms. Jamie Bergman
Phone and voice mail: 614-292-1123

FAX: 614-688-3984
E-mail: basp@osu.edu
BASP web site: www.basp.osu.edu

1835 Neil Avenue Mall
Columbus, OH 43210-1287

Editorial Associate: Ms. Jamie Bergman
Phone: 614-292-1123; FAX: 614-688-3984

E-mail: basp@osu.edu
BASP web site: www.basp.osu.edu

Compared to other published work in applied social psychology, how would you rank this manuscript in terms of potential impact (e.g., likelihood of being cited by others, likelihood of influencing the direction of research in its area)? Provide a percentile score between 0 and 100 (100 = greatest impact):

Percentage Rating: __________

Add any additional comments to this form or within the submitted email..