jpsp-topic-selection

Topic Selection & Section Fit (jpsp-topic-selection)

JPSP rewards a theoretical contribution, not just a clean effect. Before anything else you must

make two decisions: (1) is the contribution big enough for JPSP's long-format, multi-study standard,

and (2) which of the three sections is it for. Picking the wrong section is a common, avoidable

cause of a desk re-route or rejection — each section is edited separately.

When to trigger

• Deciding whether a project is a JPSP paper or belongs in a shorter / more specialized outlet
• Choosing among ASC, IRGP, and PPID
• Reframing a single-study finding into a JPSP-scale theoretical package

Step 1 — Choose the section

| Section | Core remit | Signals it's the right home |

|---------|-----------|------------------------------|

| ASC — Attitudes and Social Cognition | Attitudes, persuasion, social cognition, attribution, stereotyping, emotion/motivation in social contexts | The contribution is about how people think, evaluate, and feel in social contexts |

| IRGP — Interpersonal Relations and Group Processes | Dyads, close relationships, intragroup and intergroup processes, group behavior | The unit is a relationship or group, not a lone perceiver |

| PPID — Personality Processes and Individual Differences | Personality structure, development, assessment; trait processes; individual differences | The contribution is about who people are and how they differ, not a manipulated social state |

> Borderline cases (e.g., self-regulation, identity, culture) can fit more than one section. Decide by

> the theoretical question the paper answers, name the section in the cover letter, and confirm the

> live per-section remit (待核实 on exact wording).

Step 2 — Test JPSP-scale fit

1. Theoretical contribution. New theory + evidence; using theory to explain a new phenomenon;

novel connections between theories; a new mechanism; conditions/moderators that reconcile

conflicting findings; a new construct shown to matter. A lone "X affects Y" effect is not enough.

1. Generative. Does it open questions, not just close one? JPSP papers seed literatures.
2. Multi-study capable. Can the idea sustain several related studies converging on the claim?

If it is inherently one study, JPSP is likely the wrong format.

1. Reaches the section's readership. It must matter beyond a narrow subtopic of the section.

Anti-patterns

• Submitting a single experiment and hoping JPSP waives the multi-study norm
• Choosing the section by author habit rather than the paper's theoretical question
• Pitching a methods-only or measure-only paper with no theoretical advance
• "Significance-chasing": a surprising effect with no theory behind it

Borderline routing: when two sections both seem to fit

The most common section-choice errors at JPSP. Decide by the theoretical question, name the section in the cover letter, and confirm live remits against the submission guidelines (待核实).

| If the paper is about… | Tempting wrong call | Decide by |

|------------------------|---------------------|-----------|

| Self-regulation | "personality → PPID" | A manipulated social state → ASC; a trait difference → PPID |

| Stigma / prejudice | "groups → IRGP" | The perceiver's cognition → ASC; intergroup process → IRGP |

| Identity / self | "individual → PPID" | A relational/group identity → IRGP; trait structure → PPID |

| Culture | "any of the three" | Route by the process, not the moderator |

A correct route is itself a fit signal: it tells the editor you understand the remit. A mis-route risks a return.

Fit pass for Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Treat this skill as an executable review pass, not a prose hint. First lock the construct validity, study sequence, power/robustness plan, and boundary conditions; then judge whether the current manuscript answers the venue's real reader: psychology reviewers who need a theoretical construct, validated measurement, and cumulative-study logic.

• Do the pass: Score the manuscript on venue fit, novelty, evidence readiness, and audience ownership; reject a prestige-only target when a sibling venue owns the contribution more directly.
• Return a ledger: give claim / evidence / risk / manuscript location rows, so the next agent can edit rather than rediscover the issue.
• Sibling guard: compare against Psychological Science for shorter general-interest findings, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin for field scope, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology for experiment-centered claims; if a sibling owns the contribution, recommend re-routing before polishing format.
• Stop condition: do not give submission-ready advice until the pack's resources/official-source-map.md has been checked for volatile rules and the manuscript has one concrete fix for the largest venue-specific risk.

Output format

【Section】ASC / IRGP / PPID  + one-line justification by theoretical question
【Contribution type】new theory / new mechanism / reconciliation / new construct / …
【Multi-study plausible】Y/N — sketch of the study set
【JPSP-scale?】Y/N — if N, where instead
【Next】jpsp-literature-positioning

Supplementary resources

• [../../resources/external_tools.md](../../resources/external_tools.md) — data sources by section/design
• [../../resources/official-source-map.md](../../resources/official-source-map.md) — official per-section remits and rules