psychbull-workflow

Psychological Bulletin Workflow Router (psychbull-workflow)

The orchestrator for a Psychological Bulletin submission. Figure out the stage and the **synthesis

type, then send the user to the matching skill. Psychological Bulletin publishes research

syntheses — systematic reviews and meta-analyses — not original primary studies**, so the router's

first job is to confirm the project is a synthesis of existing work, not a new experiment or pure

theory.

When to trigger

• Starting a new Psychological Bulletin review/meta-analysis and unsure where to begin
• Mid-project and unsure which skill applies next
• Deciding which synthesis type fits (meta-analysis vs. systematic vs. qualitative review)
• Returning with a decision letter (route to psychbull-rebuttal)

First question: is this even a Bulletin paper, and which type?

| Situation | Synthesis type | Route to |

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

| Many comparable studies with extractable effect sizes | Meta-analysis | full pipeline below |

| Large literature, appraisal needed but pooling uncertain | Systematic review (PRISMA) | pipeline, lighter on meta-analysis-methods |

| Synthesizing across prior reviews or qualitative findings | Meta-review / meta-synthesis | topic-selection + theory-integration |

| Database resists quantitative pooling | Qualitative / narrative review | topic-selection + theory-integration |

| New data / a new experiment | Off-fit — primary study | another APA empirical journal |

| Pure new theory | Off-fit | Psychological Review |

> If you have original data or a brand-new theory with no synthesis, stop: Psychological Bulletin is

> the wrong venue. It synthesizes what already exists.

Routing map (stage → skill)

Review-worthy / meta-analyzable?    → psychbull-topic-selection
How do I find all the studies?      → psychbull-literature-search-strategy
Which studies are in, and coded?    → psychbull-inclusion-and-coding
How do I pool the effects?          → psychbull-meta-analysis-methods
What moves the effect? Bias?        → psychbull-moderators-and-bias
What does it all mean theoretically?→ psychbull-theory-integration
Are the exhibits MARS-ready?        → psychbull-tables-figures
Does it read in APA 7th / MARS?     → psychbull-writing-style
Protocol, data, code transparent?   → psychbull-open-science-and-transparency
Ready to submit?                    → psychbull-submission
Got an R&R / decision?              → psychbull-rebuttal

Default order

`topic-selection → literature-search-strategy → inclusion-and-coding → meta-analysis-methods →

moderators-and-bias → theory-integration → tables-figures → writing-style →

open-science-and-transparency → submission → rebuttal`

Iterate: most syntheses loop search ↔ coding ↔ analysis as new studies surface. Register the protocol

(open-science-and-transparency) before screening, even though it appears late in the default order.

Anti-patterns

• Treating Psychological Bulletin like a primary-study journal — it publishes syntheses, not new data
• Sending original theory here instead of to Psychological Review
• Starting analysis before a documented, reproducible search (no PRISMA trail)
• Pooling without a protocol — preregister before screening

Where syntheses stumble at the APA review flagship

The router exists because most Psychological Bulletin failures are stage-misalignment failures: work

done out of order, or a step skipped, at the APA's flagship synthesis journal. The diagnostic table:

| Symptom | Missed stage | Route to |

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

| "Is this even a Bulletin paper?" | Fit not tested | psychbull-topic-selection |

| Analysis underway with no PRISMA trail | Search undocumented | psychbull-literature-search-strategy |

| Coders disagree, no κ reported | Coding/reliability | psychbull-inclusion-and-coding |

| Pooled number, no I²/PI | Heterogeneity unmodeled | psychbull-meta-analysis-methods |

| "Competent but not a contribution" | No theory | psychbull-theory-integration |

| "Available on request" | No deposit | psychbull-open-science-and-transparency |

Worked vignette — routing a synthesis end to end

Illustrative figures only. A team with ~40 randomized self-affirmation trials enters at

topic-selection (confirmed: a meta-analyzable synthesis, not new data), registers the protocol on OSF

before screening, runs the documented search to k = 42, double-codes (κ = 0.81), fits a random-effects

/RVE model (g = 0.34, I² = 68%), probes the delivery-format moderator and converging bias diagnostics,

then integrates the result into a refined theoretical account before building MARS-ready exhibits and

the masked submission. Each arrow below is one hop in that path; the protocol step is pulled early even

though it sits late in the default order.

Referee/editor pushback the router pre-empts

• "No reproducible search underlies this analysis." → The router blocks analysis until

literature-search-strategy has produced a PRISMA trail.

• "This is original data, not a synthesis." → The first-question table flags it as off-fit and redirects

to a primary-study journal or Psychological Review.

• "The protocol postdates screening." → The default-order note forces preregistration before screening.

Output format

【Stage】topic / search / coding / analysis / moderators-bias / theory / exhibits / writing / transparency / submit / rebut
【Synthesis type】meta-analysis / systematic / meta-review / qualitative (or OFF-FIT → which journal)
【Route to】psychbull-<skill>
【Why】one line
【Then】the next skill after that

Supplementary resources

• [../../resources/external_tools.md](../../resources/external_tools.md) — synthesis lifecycle tooling by stage
• [../../resources/official-source-map.md](../../resources/official-source-map.md) — official Psychological Bulletin URLs behind every fact in this pack