To submit an article online, and to check the status of your submission, you need to have an account with Health Psychology Bulletin
Don't have an account? Register Here.Start Submission
Submissions should be made electronically through this website.
Please ensure that you consider the following guidelines when preparing your manuscript. Failure to do so may delay the processing of your submission. A downloadable version of the style guide is available by clicking here.
Authors should strive to keep articles below or around 4000 words. Please justify longer papers in the cover letter.
All word limits exclude referencing and citation.
The aim of HPB is to contribute to solving a number of problems of Health Psychology. One of these problems is publication bias (a bias in which research gets published); another is significant outcome bias (a bias in how research is reported); another is the vulnerability of Health Psychology to incorrect analyses; and yet another is the neglect to share lessons learnt.
HPB embodies three means to remedy these problems. First, it publishes all reports that convey a lesson, including null findings and reports of failed manipulations. Second, it enforces Full Disclosure, so that, for example, reports of failed manipulations are completely accessible and enable future researchers to avoid the same pitfalls. Third, HPB discourages the type of narrative that is encouraged by many other journals. Specifically, HPB discourages ‘selling’ results, instead promoting objective narrative, valuing what can be learnt over confirmation or falsification of a theory.
This rationale is based on the acknowledgement that knowledge accumulation largely happens through meta-analysis, and adequate meta-analysis requires unbiased reporting of all research outcomes. Thus, HPB papers are technical reports, prioritising systematic description of methodological specifics and study outcomes over narratives that incorporate findings in a coherent story. It is useful to keep this policy in mind when reading this checklist.
When submitting an empirical paper, first only submit the introduction and methods sections, as well as the Replication Package. The Results and Discussion sections are only submitted after the first tier has been completed (and the contribution has been provisionally accepted).
Because HPB has a Full Disclosure policy, all submissions should be accompanied by a Replication Package. Therefore, check whether you included everything somebody would need to conduct a direct replication of your study, such as:
Once the introduction and methods sections have been provisionally accepted, this means the editors and reviewers consider the contribution informative. This practically guarantees publication, as long as reviewers’ and editors’ requests regarding the analysis and the way these are interpreted are followed (this is important to correct any tendencies to prevent ‘overselling’, remedy reluctance to acknowledge null findings as null findings, and avoid other practices that contribute to publication and significant outcome bias).
The review process from here on will mainly focus on improving the analyses. In this process, it is important to acknowledge the limitations to the authors’ methodological and statistical competence. For example, if reviewers request multilevel analyses, and if those are indeed more appropriate, it is not mandatory to conduct multilevel analyses. Instead, the authors can opt to explain in the paper that while those would be better, they were not conducted because none of the authors is sufficiently proficient with that type of analysis to adequately apply and interpret them. This policy is implemented because, despite the unfortunate implicit assumption otherwise, not all researchers are also statisticians. Because of HPB’s Full Disclosure policy, other researchers can re-analyse the data with superior methods, if they choose to do so. If authors feel less than entirely confident with a given statistical procedure, it may be better to not perform it, instead of performing it and doing it wrong.
Note that the pre-publication reviewers may also not be expert in a given analysis; thus, there is no guarantee that all errors are detected during the pre-publication peer review process. Therefore, any errors may only be pointed out in post-publication peer reviews.
If the first tier of the review process has been completed, the results and discussion sections can be submitted. This checklist can be useful to make sure everything that needs to be included, is included.
The title page must include all of the below information, in the same order. No further information should be included:
Author names must include a forename and a surname. Forenames should preferably not include only initials.
The affiliation should ideally include Department, Institution, City and Country, however only the Institution and Country are mandatory.
Note that if the article undergoes double-blind review then the title page should be submitted separately from the main text.
Research articles must have the main text prefaced by an abstract of no more than 250 words summarising the main arguments and conclusions of the article. This must have the heading ‘Abstract’ and be easily identified from the start of the main text.
A list of up to six key words may be placed below the abstract (optional).
The Abstract and Keywords should also be added to the metadata when making the initial online submission.
The body of the submission should be structured in a logical and easy to follow manner. A clear introduction section should be given that allows non-specialists in the subject an understanding of the publication and a background of the issue(s) involved. Methods, results, discussion and conclusion sections may then follow to clearly detail the information and research being presented.
Up to three level headings may be present and must be clearly identifiable using different font sizes, bold or italics. We suggest using Headings 1, 2 and 3 in MS-Word’s ‘Style’ section.
Any acknowledgements must be headed and in a separate page, included in the document with the title page (in the final paper, this will be included after the main text but before the references).
If any of the authors have any competing interests then these must be declared. A short paragraph should be added in the document containing the title page; in the final paper, this declaration will be included after the main text but before the references. Guidelines for competing interests can be found here.
Ethics and consent (if applicable)
Research involving human subjects, human material, or human data, must have been performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Where applicable, the studies must have been approved by an appropriate ethics committee and the authors should include a statement within the article text detailing this approval, including the name of the ethics committee and reference number of the approval. The identity of the research subject should be anonymised whenever possible. For research involving human subjects, informed consent to participate in the study must be obtained from participants (or their legal guardian).
Experiments using animals must follow national standards of care. For further information, click here.
All references cited within the submission must be listed at the end of the main text file.
Health Psychology Bulletin (HPB) strongly recommends Full Disclosure. Full Disclosure is the practice of publishing everything required to replicate a study as well as the analyses of its data (for more information, see here).
At HPB, this Full Disclosure policy is implemented in the Replication and Analysis Packages.
The Replication Package contains everything other researchers require to replicate a study, such as study protocols, questionnaires, source code of computer tasks, stimuli, and the forms that were used to obtain ethical approval. The Replication Package contains everything that was developed or collected before data collection. This means it contains all operationalisations for quantitative research, the interview schemes or topic lists for qualitative research, all supporting protocols, all analysis plans and power analyses if applicable, the communications used to recruit and debrief participants, the forms or letters used to request ethical permission from an institutional review board (IRB), and the letter providing that permission. Another researcher should be able to download the Replication Package and run the same study.
The Analysis Package contains everything other researchers require to replicate the analysis conducted upon the data that were collected in a study. The Analysis Package therefore contains the raw datafile(s), all analysis scripts that were used to produce the results (for example SPSS syntax files or R scripts), and the resulting output. If the datafiles do not have English and self-explanatory variable names (e.g. 'selfEfficacyBeliefs_condomUseIsEasy', 'HADS_suddenFeelingsPanic') please provide a codebook. Make sure that the analysis script is commented to explain the rationale of each analysis.
How to compile the Full Disclosure Packages
The Full Disclosure Packages (i.e. the Replication Package and the Analysis Package) should together contain all products generated in the study. These files can simply be archived using whichever directory structure the files are in (or they can all be placed in one directory). If the files do not have English and self-explanatory filenames (e.g. 'protocols - instructions to experimenter.docx', 'raw data.csv', 'analysis script - datacleaning.R', and 'operationalisations - t0 - questionnaires.pdf'), include a manifest called 'manifest.txt' (or 'manifest.odt', 'manifest.rtf' or 'manifest.docx') where the content of each file is described.
How to archive multiple files and directories into one archive file
To archive multiple files, a number of tools exist, though many operating systems such as Windows and OSX offer native capability to archive. The easiest way to find out how to archive files for your operating system is to enter the query 'how to archive files in a zip archive using' appended with the name and version of your operating system into a search engine. For example, when using Windows 10, you could google 'how to archive files in a zip archive using windows 10' to find a number of easy to follow instructions (such as this one or this one).
How to submit the Full Disclosure Packages
You can submit your Full Disclosure Packages to an acceptabel repository (e.g. the free Open Science Framework (OSF), your institution's repository or the journal's own dataverse, and upload a file with a link to that repository along with your article submission to HPB.
Remember that the review procedure at HPB is doubleblinded, so make sure to 'anonymize' all files. When using the Open Science Framework as repository, for example, make sure to generate an anonymous read-only link (tab Contributors, add View-Only link at the bottom, then check the checkbox to Anonymize the contributor link).
Preferred file formats
It is important that researchers all over the world have access to your Full Disclosure Packages. This means that proprietary file formats should be avoided. Here is a table with a number of recommendations for different types of files. Of course, avoiding proprietary formats is not always possible. If data was collected using proprietary software, export options are often limited, because commercial software producers often wish to limit the ease with which their customers could switch to a different package (investing in making it easier for their customers to leave is not an obvious choice). In those cases, simply submit the 'sub-optimal' format (and maybe look into Open alternatives for your software).
What if you don't have (complete) Full Disclosure Packages?
Because one of the goals of HPB is to start publishing file drawered studies, it is possible that you still have reports for which you no longer have the raw data, operationalisations, analysis scripts, or output. Similarly, you may still have reports of studies that were conducted before ethical testing by IRB's was common or even possible. In those cases, simply collect everything you have, and combine this with a document where you explain what you omitted, and why you omitted these resources. If you have no Replication Package or Analysis Package at all, simply upload two documents explaining this.
If you conducted a study in another language than English, you don't have to translate, for example, the study protocols and the operationalisations. However, the datafiles must use English language variable names and value labels (or an English language codebook must be included), and analysis scripts must be commented in English, so that the analyses can be scrutinized and reproduced by all researchers.
For the submission title:
Capitalise all nouns, pronouns, adjectives, verbs, adverbs and subordinate conjunctions (i.e. as, because, although). Use lowercase for all articles, coordinate conjunctions and prepositions.
Headings within the main text:
First level headings in the text should follow the same rule as the main title.
For lower-level subheadings, only capitalise first letter and proper nouns.
Headings should be under 75 characters.
Submissions must be made in English. Authors are welcome to use American or British spellings as long as they are used consistently throughout the whole of the submission.
When referring to proper nouns and normal institutional titles, the official, original spelling must be used.
American or English grammar rules may be used as long as they are used consistently and match the spelling format (see above). For instance, you may use a serial comma or not.
The font used should be commonly available and in an easily readable size. This may be changed during the typesetting process.
Underlined text should be avoided whenever possible.
Bold or italicised text to emphasise a point are permitted, although should be restricted to minimal occurrences to maximise their efficiency.
Use bullet points to denote a list without hierarchy or order of value. If the list indicates a specific sequence then a numbered list must be used.
Lists should be used sparingly to maximise their impact.
Use single quotation marks except for quotes within another speech, in which case double quotation marks are used.
Quotations that are longer than three lines in length must be in an indented paragraph separate from the main text.
The standard, non-italicised font must be used for all quotes.
It must be clear from the text and/or citation where the quote is sourced. If quoting from material that is under copyright then permission will need to be obtained from the copyright holder.
Acronyms & Abbreviations
With abbreviations, the crucial goal is to ensure that the reader – particularly one who may not be fully familiar with the topic or context being addressed – is able to follow along. Spell out almost all acronyms on first use, indicating the acronym in parentheses immediately thereafter. Use the acronym for all subsequent references.
A number of abbreviations are so common that they do not require the full text on the first instance. Examples of these can be found here.
Abbreviations should usually be in capital letters without full stops.
Common examples from Latin origin do not follow this rule and should be lower case and can include full stops.
Use of footnotes/endnotes
Use endnotes rather than footnotes (we refer to these as ‘Notes’ in the online publication). These will appear at the end of the main text, before ‘References’.
All notes should be used only where crucial clarifying information needs to be conveyed.
Avoid using notes for purposes of referencing, with in-text citations used instead. If in-text citations cannot be used, a source can be cited as part of a note.
Please insert the endnote marker after the end punctuation.
Symbols are permitted within the main text and datasets as long as they are commonly in use or have explanatory definition on their first usage.
Hyphenation, em and en dashes
There is no set rule on the use of hyphenation between words, as long as they are consistently used.
Em dashes should be used sparingly. If they are present, they should denote emphasis, change of thought or interruption to the main sentence and can replace comas, parentheses, colons or semicolons.
En dashes can be used to replace ‘to’ when indicating a range. No space should surround the dash.
For numbers zero to nine please spell the whole words. Please use figures for numbers 10 or higher.
We are happy for authors to use either words or figures to represent large whole figures (i.e. one million or 1,000,000) as long as the usage is consistent throughout the text.
If the sentence includes a series of numbers then figures must be used in each instance.
If the number appears as part of a dataset, in conjunction with a symbol or as part of a table then the figure must be used.
If a sentence starts with a number it must be spelt, or the sentence should be re-written so that it no longer starts with the number.
Do not use a comma for a decimal place.
Numbers that are less than zero must have ‘0’ precede the decimal point.
Units of measurement
Symbols following a figure to denote a unit of measurement must be taken from the latest SI brochure. See http://www.bipm.org/utils/common/pdf/si_brochure_8_en.pdf for the full brochure.
Formulae must be proofed carefully by the author. Editors will not edit formulae. If special software has been used to create formulae, the way it is laid out is the way they will appear in the publication.
Figures, including graphs and diagrams, must be professionally and clearly presented. If a figure is not easy to understand or does not appear to be of a suitable quality, the editor may ask to re-render or omit it.
All figures must be cited within the main text, in consecutive order using Arabic numerals (e.g. Figure 1, Figure 2, etc.).
Each figure must have an accompanying descriptive main title. This should clearly and concisely summarise the content and/or use of the figure image. A short additional figure legend is optional to offer a further description.
Figure titles and legends should be placed within the text document, either after the paragraph of their first citation, or as a list after the references.
The source of the image should be included, along with any relevant copyright information and a statement of authorisation (if needed).
If your figure file includes text then please present the font as Ariel, Helvetica, or Verdana. This will mean that it matches the typeset text.
NOTE: All figures must be uploaded separately as supplementary files during the submission process, if possible in colour and at a resolution of at least 300dpi. Each file should not be more than 20MB. Standard formats accepted are: JPG, TIFF, GIF, PNG, EPS. For line drawings, please provide the original vector file (e.g. .ai, or .eps).
Tables must be created using a word processor's table function, not tabbed text.
Tables should be included in the manuscript. The final layout will place the tables as close to their first citation as possible.
All tables must be cited within the main text, numbered with Arabic numerals in consecutive order (e.g. Table 1, Table 2, etc.).
Each table must have an accompanying descriptive title. This should clearly and concisely summarise the content and/or use of the table. A short additional table legend is optional to offer a further description of the table. The table title and legend should be placed underneath the table.
Tables should not include:
NOTE: If there are more columns than can fit on a single page, then the table will be placed horizontally on the page. If it still can't fit horizontally on a page, the table will be broken into two.
Every use of information from other sources must be cited in the text so that it is clear that external material has been used.
If the author is already mentioned in the main text then the year should follow the name within parenthesis.
If the author name is not mentioned in the main text then the surname and year should be inserted, in parenthesis, after the relevant text. Multiple citations should be separated by semi-colon and follow alphabetical order.
If three or fewer authors are cited from the same citation then all should be listed. If four or more authors are part of the citation then ‘et al.’ should follow the first author name.
If citations are used from the same author and the same year, then a lowercase letter, starting from ‘a’, should be placed after the year.
If specific pages are being cited then the page number should follow the year, after a colon.
For publications authored and published by organisations, use the short form of the organisation’s name or its acronym in lieu of the full name.
Please do not include URLs in parenthetical citations, but rather cite the author or page title and include all details, including the URL, in the reference list.
All citations must be listed at the end of the text file, in alphabetical order of authors’ surnames.
All reading materials should be included in ‘References’ – works which have not been cited within the main text, but which the author wishes to share with the reader, must be cited as additional information in endnotes explaining the relevance of the work. This will ensure that all works within the reference list are cited within the text.
NOTE: If multiple works by the same author are being listed, please re-type the author’s name out for each entry, rather than using a long dash.
NOTE: DOIs should be included for all reference entries, where possible.
This journal uses the APA system – see below for examples of how to format:
Author, A. A. (year). Title of work. Location: Publisher. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/xx.xxxxxxxx
Leaver, B. L., Ehrman, M., & Shekhtman, B. (2005). Achieving success in second language acquisition. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511610431
Jacobs, G. M., & Hall, S. (2002). Implementing cooperative learning. In J. C. Richards & W. A. Renandya (Eds.), Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice (pp. 52-58). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667190.009
NOTE: If multiple works by the same author are being listed, please re-type the author’s name out for each entry, rather than using a long dash.
Author, A. A., Author, B. B., & Author, C. C. (year). Article title. Journal Title, volume number(issue number), page numbers. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/xx.xxxxxxxx
Radford, M. (2001). Aesthetic and religious awareness among pupils: Similarities and differences. British Journal of Music Education, 18(2), 151-159. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0265051701000249
NOTE: Please include DOIs for all journal articles where possible.
Author, A. (year, date). Article title. Newspaper. Retrieved from www.URL
McMahon, S. (2010, July 19). Fund new Victorian era. Herald Sun. Retrieved from http://www.heraldsun.com.au/
Author, A. (year, date). Article title. Newspaper. pp. page number
Parker, K. (2008, December 3). Plea for languages. Koori Mail, pp. 19-20
Author, A. (year, month). Title. Paper presented at Conference title, Location, Country.
Liu, C., Wu, D., Fan, J., & Nauta, M. M. (2008, November). Does job complexity predict job strains? Paper presented at the 8th Biannual Conference of the European Academy of Occupational Health Psychology, Valencia, Spain.
Organisation. (year). Title. Series/publication number. Retrieved from (if online)
World Bank. (2008). Textbooks and school library provision in secondary education in Sub-Saharan Africa (World Bank Working Paper No. 126. Africa Human Development Series). Retrieved from EBL database.
Author, A. A. (year). Thesis title (Doctoral dissertation, Institution, location). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/xx.xxxxxxxx
Murray, B. P. (2008). Prior knowledge, two teaching approaches for metacognition: Main idea and summarization strategies in reading (Doctoral dissertation, Fordham University, New York)
Author, A. A. (year). Title of work. Retrieved month day, year, from source.
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2011). Australia's health 2004. Retrieved from http://www.aihw.gov.au/publications/index.cfm/title/10014
As part of the submission process, authors are required to check off their submission's compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.
|Pre-registered study report||500.00€|
|Systematic review or meta-analysis||500.00€|
|Open Methods paper||500.00€|
European Health Psychology Society (EHPS) members qualify for a €100 discount. Authors who are not EHPS members can become members by visiting the Society’s website.
€400 of the APC for HPB covers all publisher processing costs (editorial processes; platform development and maintenance; indexing; marketing; archiving; DOI registration etc) and ensures that all of the content is fully open access. This approach maximises the potential readership of publications and allows the journal to be run in a sustainable way. See the publisher's website for a breakdown of processing costs. €70 of the APC for HPB goes to EHPS. €30 cover the publisher’s administrative costs for handling the discount.
Many institutions have funds available to support open access publications by their staff, therefore we ask that you contact the relevant body to cover the APC.
If you do not know about your institution’s policy on open access funding, please contact your departmental/faculty administrators and institution library, as funds may be available to you.
If published, authors will receive an APC request email along with information on how payment can be arranged from Open Access Key (OAK).
If you do not have funds available to pay the APC (eg because your institution/funder will not cover the fee) then we may be able to offer a discount or full waiver. Please ensure that you contact the editor as early as possible should you need to discuss waiver options or the APC in general. Editorial decisions are made independently from the ability to pay the APC.