Strategies and attributes of highly productive scholars and contributors to the school psychology literature: Recommendations for increasing scholarly productivity

Journal article citation classics in school psychology: Analysis of the most cited articles in five school psychology journals

“…Because school psychology as a field has long been driven by educational, psychological, and special educational policies and practices-many of which have had little or no research base-this need for clarification about policy and its implementation makes school psychology so different from some other applied psychology fields. Based on this logic, the results of the current study would likely differ drastically from those from a study reporting school psychologists' opinions about the most important publications of the past 50 years (see both Strein, 1987 andMartinez et al, 2011, for examples of related research). It may be that the newsletters available from state and national organizations more broadly reflect the needs of most school psychologists.…”

Publication criteria and recommended areas of improvement within school psychology journals as reported by editors, journal board members, and manuscript authors

“…Clearly, there are a significant number of responsibilities that need to be met and a significant number of skills that need to be displayed to produce a manuscript that is appropriate for submission to a scholarly journal. For example, it has been recommended that authors, before submitting a manuscript for review, confirm that the target journal is still appropriate, review the journal editor's guidelines for submission, and proofread their manuscript (see Floyd et al, 2011;Martinez, Floyd, & Erichsen, 2011;Nihalani & Mayrath, 2008).…”

“…When revising and resubmitting a manuscript, authors typically include a letter to the action editor stating exactly what was changed, where it was changed, and how the change satisfies reviewers' recommendations. In the case of manuscript rejection, authors should consider revising the manuscript based on the editor's suggestions and submitting the manuscript to another journal that may be a better fit for the topic and research quality (Martinez et al, 2011). Although the peer-review process is tedious and time-consuming, it is considered by many to be a scientific necessity.…”

“…Additionally, authors may feel that reviewers do not thoroughly review manuscripts and that they misunderstand main points, provide inappropriate suggestions, and are overly critical in their comments. As a result, authors may feel that their submissions are being evaluated by incompetent, biased, and inexperienced reviewers (Fine, 1996;Martinez et al, 2011). Whether the peer-review process simply lends itself to low inter-reviewer agreement or whether reviewers engage in biased acts, some authors believe that the peer-review system prevents good work from being published and allows work to be published that should not be (Campbell, 1982).…”

“…In addition to books focused on publishing in psychology journals (e.g., Sternberg, 2000;Sternberg & Sternberg, 2010; see also Martinez et al, 2011), checklists and publishing guidelines are also available to aid authors. For example, Onwuegbuzie and Daniel (2005) published an evidence-based checklist focusing on common manuscript errors.…”