This Article Full Text (PDF) Services Download to citation manager

Editorial

Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences

What an exciting time in the trajectory of psychological gerontology to become editor of Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences! Research is both expanding to encompass new areas of investigation, and deepening to provide greater insight into traditional topics. Curiosity about aging and interest in discovering new mechanisms underlying psychological outcomes steer researchers toward investigations that are changing what we know and how we think about adulthood. The emergence of strong and creative research designs, along with powerful statistical techniques allows for probing into a broadening range of psychological processes, linking them with physical and social processes, and creating an enriched and nuanced understanding of aging.

An informal scan of the journal's contents under the past three editors (Antonucci, Lachman, and Hess, 1996–2007) revealed a wide array of papers that could be classified under headings as diverse as health and disease processes and effects; physical functioning; sensory processes; personality characteristics and processes; cognition, learning, memory, wisdom; individual characteristics and responses to aging; interpersonal relationships; caregiving and long-term care; life events and contexts; interventions; and designs and methods. These papers addressed the journal's official mission, which is to publish "articles on adulthood and old age with clear implications for theory or methods relevant to advancing the psychological science of aging, including clinical, developmental, experimental, and social aspects." They extended the range of foci mentioned in the mission statement: "Appropriate topics include, but are not limited to, attitudes, cognition, educational gerontology, emotion, health psychology, industrial gerontology, interpersonal relations, neuropsychology, perception, personality, physiological psychology, and sensation." One of my goals as journal editor is to continue coverage of a wide range of both traditional and innovative topics. The best contributions will be reports that are conceptually or methodologically innovative and scientifically compelling.

Research ideas typically spring from investigators' interests and experiences, but occasionally scientific bodies aid the process of identifying new areas of study. Relevant to the psychology of aging, the National Institute on Aging (NIA) recently commissioned the National Academy of Sciences to evaluate NIA's priorities and future course. One result is a compendium of promising research directions edited by Carstensen and Hartel (2006). Sections on The Social Side of Human Aging, Motivation and Behavioral Change, Socioemotional Influences on Decision Making, Social Engagement and Cognition, and The Impact of Stereotypes on Self and Others offer a wealth of ideas about potential new studies. I would like to add my own suggestion that researchers give greater attention to the impact of social locations on psychological processes and outcomes. Gerontologists have embraced the biopsychosocial model of influences on development and aging at the conceptual level for several decades; recently they have begun to operationalize it in a sophisticated way. One example is research showing the power of linking biomarkers of stress with health outcomes. I offer two challenges to readers of this journal: incorporate multiple aspects of the biopsychosocial model in your studies on the psychology of aging and collaborate with investigators in other areas of gerontology to introduce psychological variables into their work.

A second editorial goal is to continue the practice of publishing theoretically-grounded work as well as findings that advance theory development. Certainly the field has no shortage of theories upon which to base research on the psychology of aging. Nevertheless, authors are not always careful to situate their research questions, hypotheses, discussions, and interpretations in theory (Roberto, Blieszner, & Allen, 2006). In the spirit of promoting widespread use of theory in our field, I want to highlight the excellent overviews of gerontological theory and theorizing in Bengtson, Putney, and Johnson (2005), Bengtson and Schaie (1999), Marshall (1996), and Salthouse (2006), to name just a few of the many resources available.

I am very pleased to introduce Elizabeth A. L. Stine-Morrow of University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign as associate editor. She will handle manuscripts related to cognition, memory, learning, and related topics. Together we will work on another important editorial goal, sustaining the journal's high quality and scholarly reputation, built so carefully by the previous editors. Features contributing to the journal's quality and reputation include scientifically rigorous articles, dedicated editorial board members and reviewers, attention to minimizing publication lag time, inclusion of international perspectives, and availability of multiple article formats. We will retain these features in the coming years. Original research reports and theoretical or methodological articles encompass 5,000 words of text and no more than 10 pages of references, tables, figures, or illustrations. Recognizing the emergence of more complex study designs and analyses, we will consider research articles extending up to 6,000 words of text if clearly warranted. Brief reports include 2,000 words of text and no more than three additional pages; New Directions in Aging Research articles typically are 4,000 words of text with up to six supporting pages.

Sometimes researchers have questions about authorship decisions or ethical matters related to publishing. The style guide for this journal, the 5^th edition of APA's Publication Manual (American Psychological Association, 2001), addresses such issues in Section 8.05 and Appendix C. Additionally, very helpful information appears in Fine and Kurdek (1993), and Graf and associates (2007). The former article focuses on special considerations for faculty-student research teams and the latter covers transparency, research integrity, editorial standards and processes, responsible publication practices, and ownership of ideas and expression. It also contains 15 flowcharts providing guidance on handling a variety of situations ranging from dealing with changes in authorship to plagiarism to conflicts of interest.

The outgoing editor, Tom Hess, has been tremendously successful in achieving the primary goal mentioned in his opening editorial: maintaining the journal's standards of quality and innovation. He has worked tirelessly over the past four years on behalf of the journal, its authors, and its readers. His tenure has been characterized by commitment, professionalism, conviction, fairness, and good humor. I am grateful for Dr. Hess's generous and kind mentoring in response to my many questions, and for insights shared by Associate Editor Karen Hooker and Editorial Assistant Heather Blasco. Ken Ferraro, Editor of Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, and Patricia Walker, GSA's Director of Publications, have also been most helpful.

I am excited about the opportunity to participate in advancing the psychology of adult development and aging in this unique way as editor of Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, yet at the same time, I am mindful of the awesome responsibility I am undertaking. Please help sustain the many strengths of this journal by submitting your best work, citing the findings of authors publishing in GSA journals, offering suggestions for New Directions in Aging Research topics and authors, recommending foci for special sections or issues, volunteering to serve as a reviewer, writing helpful peer reviews and returning them promptly, and contacting me with ideas, questions, or concerns. I am honored to serve as editor and committed to upholding the high standards set by my predecessors.

References

• American Psychological Association. (2001). Publication manual (5^th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
• Bengtson, V. L., Putney, N. M., Johnson, M. L. (2005). The problem of theory in gerontology today. In M. L. Johnson (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of age and ageing (pp. 3–20). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
• Bengtson, V. L., Schaie, K. W., (Eds.). (1999). Handbook of theories of aging. New York: Springer Publishing Company.
• Carstensen, L. L., Hartel, C. R., (Eds.). (2006). When I'm 64. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
• Fine, M. A., Kurdek, L. A. (1993). Reflections on determining authorship credit and authorship order on faculty-student collaborations. American Psychologist, 48,1141-1147.
• Graf, C., Wager, E., Bowman, A., Fiak, S., Scott-Lichter, D., Robinson, A. (2007). Best practice guidelines on publication ethics: A publisher's perspective. International Journal of Clinical Practice, 61,(Suppl 152), 1-26.[Medline]
• Marshall, V. W. (1996). The state of theory in aging and the social sciences. In R. H. Binstock & L. K. George (Eds.), Handbook of aging and the social sciences (pp. 12–30). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
• Roberto, K. A., Blieszner, R., Allen, K. R. (2006). Theorizing in family gerontology: New opportunities for research and practice. Family Relations, 55,513-525.
• Salthouse, T. A. (2006). Theoretical issues in the psychology of aging. In J. E. Birren & K. W. Schaie (Eds.), Handbook of the psychology of aging (6^th ed., pp. 3–13). Burlington, MA: Elsevier Academic Press.

This Article Full Text (PDF) Services Download to citation manager