Submissions

Online Submissions

Already have a Username/Password for Análise Psicológica?
Go to Login

Need a Username/Password?
Go to Registration

Registration and login are required to submit items online and to check the status of current submissions.

 

Author Guidelines

All articles must comply with APA (American Psychological Association) standards regarding the style of presentation of the manuscript and the ethical aspects of scientific work.

The article should be written in Microsoft Word (.doc or .docx) and not exceed 25 pages (starting on page 1 with the Abstract and including Figures, Tables, Appendices and References in addition to the body text).

Articles (Max: 25 pages): reports of original, high-quality work based on thorough and systematic research. Theoretical or review articles will be considered, although in limited numbers, as long as they present a critical and appropriate analysis of a wide range of work on subjects of interest to the development of psychology. The journal also has a section dedicated to Research Methods and Instruments.

General guidelines

A. Layout: A4 size (21 x 29.7cm). The article should not be longer than 25 pages, from the abstract to the References, including Tables, Figures and Appendices.

B. Font: Times New Roman, size 12, throughout the text, including references, footnotes, tables, etc.

C. Margins: 2.5cm on all sides (top, bottom, left and right).

D. Spacing: double-spaced throughout the manuscript, including the title page (not identifying the authors), Abstract, Text, References, Appendices, etc.

E. Text alignment: to the left.

F. Paragraph: 1.25cm.

G. Alignment of page numbers: in the top right-hand corner, at the level of the first line on each page.

H. Heading: the first two or three words of the title should appear 5 spaces to the left of the page number. The heading will be used to identify the manuscript during the editorial process. When using MS Word, when you insert the heading and number on one of the pages, these elements will appear on all the others.

I. Internet addresses: all “URL” addresses (links to the Internet) in the text (e.g. http://pkp.sfu.ca) must be active.

J. Order of manuscript elements: Unidentified title page, Abstract, Text, References, Appendices, Tables and Figures. Each element should start on a new page.

K. Elements of the manuscript:

  • Unidentified title page: Maximum 15 words, with the first letter in capital letters, center aligned.
  • Abstract with keywords: Paragraphs of no more than 200 words, with the title “Abstract” center-aligned on the first line after the heading. At the end of the Abstract list at least 3, and no more than 5, keywords (in capital letters, separated by semicolons).
  • Text: The title of the manuscript is not necessary on this page. Sub-sections of the text should not begin on new pages and their titles should be aligned to the center, with the first letter of each word capitalized (e.g. “Results”, “Methods” and “Discussion”). The subheadings of the subsections should be in italics with the first letter of each word capitalized (for example, the subheading of the “Methods” subsection: “Subjects” or “Data Analysis”). The words “Figure”, “Table”, “Annex” appearing in the text should have the first letter capitalized followed by the number (Figures and Tables) or letter (Annexes) to which they refer. The suggested locations for the insertion of figures and tables should be indicated in the text.

L. Funding: Revista 'Análise Psicológica' asks all authors to identify their sources of funding. The format of the text could be, for example:

Funding: This research was funded by ...

If the authors' research was not funded, they should state 'This research did not receive any specific funding from any public or private funding agency, or from any entity'.

M. Authors' contributions: Individual contributions should be specified in a 'Statement of Authors' Contribution' format. The statement should represent all authors and should be included in the submission. See an example here:

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, [name initials in caps], [name initials in caps] and [name initials in caps]; methodology, [name initials in caps] and [name initials in caps]; formal analysis, [name initials in caps]; data collection, [name initials in caps] and [name initials in caps]; writing—original draft preparation, [name initials in caps]; writing—review and editing, [name initials in caps], [name initials in caps] and [name initials in caps]. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

All contributions that do not meet the criteria for attribution of authorship must be specifically presented in a statement called Acknowledgments (optional statement).

N. Submission of manuscripts: A manuscript must be submitted in at least two documents, as the journal is committed to blind peer review. The anonymization of the manuscript itself is essential and authors should prepare a separate document with the authors' details. The following should be considered

A document with the Title (without abbreviations); Names and surnames of all authors in the order in which they should appear in the publication; Name, institution, address and e-mail address of the author for correspondence; Affiliation of all authors; E-mail addresses and orcid numbers of all authors; Author Contributions; Reference to all funds received or research contracts (Funding); Acknowledgments (Optional statement).

Another document containing the abstracts in English and Portuguese, the keywords and the text of the manuscript itself, pointing out that the bibliographical references should be made in accordance with APA standards (7 Ed.).

O. Declaration of consent to publication: After the submission process, the author responsible for the submission must respond to the following declaration:

I declare, on behalf of all the authors, that this manuscript is original and has not been the subject of any other type of publication. I also declare, on behalf of all the authors, that I authorize the publication of the manuscript, once the review process has been completed and the status of 'Accepted for publication' has been decreed by the Editor-in-Chief.

 

Submission Preparation Checklist

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.

  1. The contribution is original and unpublished and is not under review or for publication by another journal, nor will it be submitted to other journals while it is under review.
  2. Files for submission are in Microsoft Word, OpenOffice or RTF format (as long as they do not exceed 2MB).
  3. URLs for the references have been provided where available.
  4. The text is double-spaced; uses a 12-point font; uses italics instead of underlining (except in URL addresses); figures and tables are at the end of the document.
  5. The text follows the style standards and bibliographic requirements described in Instructions for Authors, in the About the Journal section.

  6. Editorial criteria for accepting psychometric articles

    In order to streamline the process of reviewing articles that present instrument validation studies, here are the criteria that all articles submitted to the Assessment Methods and Instruments section must meet.

    Violation of any of these criteria will be accepted as long as valid arguments are provided in the introduction or discussion of the article. This must be mentioned in a letter to the editor, which also states the exceptional conditions that must be met when publishing the article.

    Article that translates and adapts an instrument to a specific population (Portuguese or any Portuguese subpopulation)
    - The aim of the article: Define it on the first page as a translation, adaptation and study of the psychometric properties of a known instrument (use non-conclusive language. Preferably use: “study”, “access”, “inform” about metric properties etc, and not “conclude” about metric properties).

    - Present a literature review that: a) defines the construct to be measured, in its convergence and divergence from other neighboring constructs; b) mentions some of the instruments developed to measure the construct; c) characterizes the instrument in focus and why it was selected (usefulness, pragmatism, relevance to certain fields of study, etc.); d) presents in detail the instrument in focus in terms of its metric qualities and the populations in which it has been studied. Define the metric consistency or inconsistency of the instrument along these approaches.

    - Discuss the definition of the construct and the form of measurement if relevant. Sometimes the definition of the construct is one-dimensional and its measurement in different and even independent dimensions. This needs to be explained.

    - Define the structure of the instrument in a table, with the items associated with their dimensions, and mark the items that will have to be inverted when computing the final score.

    - Define the research process to be presented in the methods section, justifying all the decisions to be made (e.g. translate with care x and y; study validity through... ; study consistency through... etc).

    - In the methods section: a) define the sample in relevant detail; b) present the instrument itself (its items, should they be included in a table or annex etc); c) define how the items will be translated/retranslated in order to guarantee their validity:

    - Results section: the process of studying the construct validity of the scale should be carried out by a confirmatory factorial analysis that supports the theoretical and empirical conception of the instrument and not by exploratory analysis. Failure to adapt a model should be followed by the testing of existing models in the literature that are presented as alternatives. Only failure to adapt them should suggest a different analysis (e.g. exploratory).  Data from confirmatory analyses should be presented without detailed explanations of the basic procedure that defines them. Only if non-standard procedures are presented should they be described in detail.

    - In the discussion section: summarize the data; present the study's limitations; compare the study with other data; define next steps

    Finally, don't forget to comply with all APA recommendations.

    Article presenting a NEW instrument and studying its metric characteristics in a specific population (Portuguese or any Portuguese subpopulation)
    - The aim of the article:  Define it on the first page as presenting a new instrument to measure construct X (use non-conclusive language: “study”, “access” inform about metric properties, etc., and not “conclude” about metric properties)

    - Present a literature review that: a) defines the construct to be measured, in its convergence and divergence from other neighboring constructs; b) refers to the instruments developed to measure the same or neighboring constructs; c) defines why it is necessary to develop a NEW instrument, making it clear why it would not be more advantageous to adapt an existing one.

    - Discuss the definition of the construct and how it is measured, if relevant. Sometimes the definition of the construct is unitary and its measurement in different and even independent dimensions. This needs to be explained.

    - Define the research process to be presented in the methods section, justifying all the decisions to be made (e.g. type of scale to be developed, Likert; semantic differential; Guttman, etc.). Define how the metric characteristics will be studied).

    -In the methods section: a) define the sample in relevant detail; b) present the instrument itself (its items, should they be included in a table or annex, etc.); c) define the way in which the items were constructed to guarantee their face validity;

    - In the results section: the process of studying the construct validity of the scale can be carried out by an exploratory OR confirmatory factorial analysis (the latter carried out in order to define the theoretical and empirical design of the instrument). If the results of the two factor analysis models are to be presented, they should be used with reference to different samples and at different times (first the EFA and then the CFA). The data from the analyses should be presented without detailed explanations of the basic procedure that defines them. Only if non-standard procedures are presented should they be described in detail.

    - Define the structure of the instrument in a table, with the items associated with their dimensions, and mark the items that will have to be inverted when computing the final score.

    - In the discussion section: summarize the data; present the study's limitations; compare the study with other data; define next steps.

    Finally, don't forget to take into account all APA recommendations.

    Teresa Garcia-Marques

    Editor of the Methods and Assessment Instruments section of Psychological Analysis