Article types
GEP accepts five types of submissions (see below). The submission category is chosen by the authors and listed on the published paper. GEP encourages authors to submit any empirical work in the form of Registered Reports. Registered Reports are clearly marked and receive a pre-registration badge. Submission of null and negative findings from high-quality research and replication studies are encouraged, with editorial decisions based on methodological quality rather than research outcomes. The word limit for each paper category can be found in Table 1. Length exceptions are rare and decided by the handling editors.
- Research articles: These submissions present original findings relevant for the field. Contributions are welcome using high-quality quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods from one or multiple studies.
- Short reports: These submissions include brief reports of high-quality, concise, and relevant research findings, replications of published findings, cross-cultural validation of psychometrics, or substantial cultural adaptation of existing measures. This format is appropriate for the reporting of concise empirical findings. Authors are encouraged to pursue nuance and transparency in the Supplement.
- Meta-analyses and systematic reviews: These submissions present comprehensive overviews of empirical research on a certain topic or research question within environmental psychology.
- Perspective articles: These submissions should present a novel viewpoint or opinion on a current challenge, concept, or practice relating to environmental psychology. They offer the opportunity to present criticism or address controversy. Please always approach the Editorial Office (editors[at]gep.psychopen.eu) prior to submission.
- Registered Reports: Any empirical work can be submitted as a Registered Report, where the methods and proposed analyses are pre-registered by the authors and reviewed prior to data collection. If reviewers find the submission to be of sufficient quality, the article is provisionally accepted for publication before data collection starts. See the word limits for Registered Reports in Table 2.
Limits for Words, References, Tables, and Figures
Table 1. Maximum number of words, references, tables, and figures for each article type
| Category | Maximum Word Count1 | Number of References2 | Number of Tables | Number of Figures |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Single-Study Research Articles Original findings, comprehensive quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods from one study |
||||
| • quantitative | 5000 | 60 | 4 | 4 |
| • qualitative/mixed methods | 5750 | 60 | 2 | 3 |
| Multiple-Studies Research Articles Original findings, comprehensive quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods from more than one studies |
7000 | 80 | 6 | 5 |
| Short Reports Brief reports of high-quality, concise and relevant research findings, replications of published study findings, cross-cultural validation of psychometrics or substantial cultural adaptation of existing measures |
2500 | 30 | 3 | 3 |
| Meta-Analyses and Systematic Reviews High-level and comprehensive overviews of empirical research |
7000 | 803 | 6 | 4 |
| Perspective Articles A novel viewpoint or opinion on a current challenge, concept or practice relating to environmental psychology |
5000 | 50 | 3 | 3 |
1Refers to the main text (incl. footnotes). Abstract, references, tables, figures, etc., do not count towards the max words.
2References for data sets, software (including R packages), etc., should be listed in the reference section and count towards the number of references.
3Plus a separate document that lists all work that was considered. No restrictions apply here.
Replications
GEP explicitly welcomes replication studies. These replications may be “successful” or “unsuccessful” (see Nosek 2020), but they need to be well done and explain the type of replication (e.g., conceptual, direct), constraints on generality (Simons 2017), and how this specific replication adds to the literature. Replication papers will always be empirical, and can have basic or applied research questions with qualitative and/or quantitative data.
Authors who are still in the process of planning their replication are encouraged to use the Registered Report format (see below). If the study has already been conducted, GEP will use a two-stage submission process with the first being blind to results.
- On initial submission, authors should:
- State if the manuscript is a replication study.
- Include a complete abstract, introduction, and methods with a detailed analysis plan. The manuscript must not contain information about the outcome-relevant results. The discussion will be withheld.
- Outcome-irrelevant results can be reported to demonstrate, for example, that experimental manipulations were effective, or outcome variables were measured reliably and conformed to distributional assumptions.
- If the submission passes initial review, then the authors can submit a complete manuscript for second-stage review. This second review is to confirm that the final report adequately addresses reviewer concerns from the initial submission, evaluate the results and their reporting, and check whether the interpretation is appropriate given the results.
Registered Reports (see cos.io/rr)
Registered Reports are a form of empirical article in which the methods and proposed analyses are pre-registered and reviewed prior to research being conducted. This format of article seeks to neutralise a variety of inappropriate research practices, including inadequate statistical power, selective reporting of results, publication bias, file drawer problems, and lead to a more rigorous scientific record (see an explanation of this format from the Center for Open Science). GEP accepts Registered Reports for all empirical articles except short reports.
Table 2. Maximum number of words for each type of Registered Report
| Type | Maximum Word Count | |
|---|---|---|
| Stage 1 | Stage 2 | |
| Single-Study Research Article | 4500 | 7000 |
| Multiple-Studies Research Article | 5500 | 8500 |
| Meta-Analysis / Systematic Review | 5500 | 8500 |
The review process for Registered Reports has two stages. In Stage 1, reviewers assess study proposals before data is collected. In Stage 2, reviewers consider the full study including results and interpretation (more details about the review process of Registered Reports).
Questions or Ideas?
If you have questions which format is best for your paper, please do not hesitate to contact us at editors[at]gep.psychopen.eu. You can also share ideas for new paper formats with us! We would love to hear them.