期刊名称：JUDGMENT AND DECISION MAKING ISSN： 1930-2975 出版频率： Bi-monthly 出版社： SOC JUDGMENT & DECISION MAKING, FLORIDA STATE UNIV, TALLAHASSEE, USA, FL, 32306-1110   出版社网址： http://journal.sjdm.org/ 期刊网址： http://journal.sjdm.org/ 影响因子： 1.856(2015年) 1.521(2014年) 1.738(2013年) 1.860 (2012年) 2.62(2011年) 主题范畴： PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY 期刊简介(About the journal)    投稿须知(Instructions to Authors)    编辑部信息(Editorial Board)    About the journal This is the journal of the Society for Judgment and Decision Making. It is open access, published on the World Wide Web, at least every two months. We have no publication charges so far. All original1 relevant articles will be considered, including short articles, attempted replications of surprising results, and adversarial collaborations, as well as new empirical contributions and theoretical articles. We encourage the submission of raw data at the time of review, and we can archive the data of accepted articles. Relevant articles deal with normative, descriptive, and/or prescriptive analyses of human judgments and decisions. These include, but are not limited to: experimental studies of judgments of hypothetical scenarios; experimental economic approaches to individual and group behavior; use of physiological methods to understand human judgments and decisions; discussion of normative models such as utility theory; and applications of relevant theory to medicine, law, consumer behavior, business, public choice, and public economics. Submitted articles will be examined by the Editor and possibly by one Associate Editor before they are sent for review. Usually the review will involve one Consulting Editor and another reviewer. This process is designed to insure speedy rejection when rejection seems warranted. The review process itself should take at most a few weeks, depending on the length of the article. Authors may remove their names if they wish, and reviewers may reveal theirs. Submitted articles must be readable by reviewers in some electronic form. Reviewers prefer tables, figures, and footnotes in the text, not at the end. Accepted articles should meet these requirements. Send submissions, comments, or questions to the Editor, Jonathan Baron, at baron@psych.upenn.edu. If you do not get an acknowledgement or response within 2 days, please try again. Indexed in * PsycInfo; * Econlit; * EconPapers; * Google Scholar; * Social Science Citation Index; * Current Contents (SBS); * Directory of Open Access Journals; * Scopus. Instructions to Authors Style guide for Judgment and Decision Making Originally written by J. Baron, 1991, with contributions from R. Rescorla and an appendix by M. E. P. Seligman. Revised by J. Baron, 2006, for Judgment and Decision Making. Most of this is advice, not requirements. We do have some requirements for published articles, such as APA (American Psychological Association) citation style (described below), but many other features of APA style do not apply. Whether you use "subjects" or "participants," for example, is up to you. (For editing, the default will be "subjects" if you use both terms.) Sections of the report Title. This should say as much as possible about the content of the paper, in as few words as possible. Abstract. This is a brief (usually one paragraph) summary of the whole paper, including the problem, the method for solving it (when not obvious), the results, and the conclusions suggested or drawn. Do not write the abstract as a hasty afterthought. Look at it as a real exercise in cramming the most information in one paragraph. The reader should not have to read any of the rest of the paper in order to understand the abstract fully. Many readers will read only the abstract. Other readers will use it to decide what to look for in the paper, or to decide whether to read the whole thing. Remember Strunk & White's admonition, ``Omit needless words.' Introduction. Tell the reader what the problem is, what question you will try to answer, and why it is important. It might be important for practical reasons or for theoretical (or methodological) reasons. Don't neglect either type of reason. Some people list questions as hypotheses, and give them names such as H1 and H2. If you do this, try to use more memorable names. If the problem is a very basic one, you may state the problem first and then review what has already been found out about it. If the problem is one that grows out of past literature, review the history of how it arose. But do not forget to mention the basic issues behind the research tradition in question, the practical or theoretical concerns that inspired it. It is sufficient to review the main papers that are directly relevant. Again, you should assume that your reader has not read them, but you need not go into detail. You should review only those points that are relevant to the arguments you will make. Do not say that ``X found Y' or ``demonstrated' if X's conclusions don't follow from X's results. You can use words like ``X claimed to show that Y' or ``suggested that' when you are not sure. If you see a flaw, you can add, ``However ...'. Try to avoid expressions like ``Unfortunately, Smith and Jones neglected to examine [precisely what you are examining].' It might have been unfortunate for them or for the field, but it is fortunate for you, and everyone knows it. The introduction should lead up to, and conclude with, a statement of how you intend to approach your question and why your approach is an improvement on past efforts (or why it is worth undertaking even if it isn't). This is essentially what is new about your approach, your particular contribution. Economists often provide an overview of the entire paper. This is fine but not necessary. Method. This section gives the details of how you went about your project. It is usually divided into subsections such as subjects, materials, and procedure. These subheadings are standard ones, but they are not always appropriate, and other subheadings are acceptable. The point of subheadings is that the reader may want to skip this section entirely and return to it later. The subheadings should make it easy to find relevant details. Excessive detail, such as verbatim copies of questionnaires, can go in an appendix. Do not say that the study was approved by some review board (unless someone required you to say this, and then say that you are required to say it). If some articles say it and others do not, readers might infer that the latter were not approved. Results. This is a summary of what you actually found. It is not a dump of your unanalyzed data, nor merely a report of whether your statistical tests were significant, but somewhere in between. It should contain whatever summary statistics will help readers see for themselves what happened, such as means and standard deviations of various conditions, and raw correlations, when these are relevant. It should also contain the results of statistical tests. Make sure to do and report just those tests that are relevant to the questions that inspired your project. Graphs, charts, and tables are often useful in this section (and elsewhere, but less often). They should be labeled consecutively either as Figures or Tables, depending on whether a typesetter could be expected to set them, (yes for tables, no for figures), e.g., Figure 1, Figure 2, Table 1, etc. Each one should have a caption explaining clearly what it is, if possible without relying on anything in the text. The text should tell the reader when to look at the figures and tables (``As shown in Figure 1 ...'), and it should point out the important points, but it should not simply repeat in writing what they say. Figures and tables should go in the text, not the end, for this journal Exact p levels are much better than statements that p is less than something. (See, for example, Wilkinson et al., American Psychologist, 54, 594-604..) Median splits are a bad idea. See Irwin, J. R. & McClelland, G. H. (2003). Negative consequences of dichotomizing continuous variables. Journal of Marketing Research, 40, 366-371. Discussion. It is a good idea to begin the discussion with a summary of the results, for the benefit of the reader who wants to skip the results section (and to remind the reader who didn't skip it but got interrupted by a phone call and forgot it). In the rest of this section, you return to your original question and tell the reader what your results have to say about it (``The results indicate that ...') and what they do not have to say (``However, the results are inconclusive concerning ...' or ``do not speak to the question of'). In each case, tell why. Try to think of objections that someone might make to the conclusions that you draw (whether the objections are correct or not) and either answer them or qualify your conclusions to take them into account (``Of course, these conclusions assume that the subjects were telling the truth, which might not be the case'). You may also say why you think the objections are weak even if they are possible (``On the other hand, there was no reason for the subjects to lie'). Your task here is not to do a sales pitch for some idea but rather to help the reader understand exactly what can and cannot be concluded. The discussion section may be combined with the results. The advantage of this is that it puts the results in the context of the issues that generate them. The disadvantage is that the flow of the discussion gets interrupted with a lot of statistics, etc. The discussion section is also the place to say anything else you want to say that does not go anywhere else. You may reflect on the implications of your results, or your methods, or whatever, for other issues that were not the main point of the paper. You can talk about how your project should have been done, and why. Or you can make a more general argument, for which your results are only a part. It is often a good idea to end the paper with a general statement of the main message. More generally, one type of well-constructed paper will reveal its main ideas to a reader who actually reads only the first and last paragraph and the first and last sentence of every intervening paragraph, and this principle applies especially to the discussion section by itself. References. This is a list of the articles cited. Articles are mentioned in the text by author and date, e.g., Author1 and Author2 (2006), or Author1 et al. (2006), or (Author1 & Author2, 2006). References at the end are listed alphabetically by author, with initials following each author's last name. For journals, both the volume and the year are usually needed as well as the page numbers, because mistakes are common. For chapters in books, page numbers are needed. Footnotes. Sometimes you want to say something that isn't quite necessary. This is the time to use a footnote. But sometimes it's hard to resist making rather extensive, but rather tangential remarks, e.g., about someone else's work. These go in footnotes, not the text. The really eager reader will read them. Others will not. General advice The "reader". You may assume your readers are intelligent, but they read only your paper, not your mind. Therefore, when you use any terms that are not obvious, you must make sure to define them so as to remove any relevant ambiguity. The need to define terms is even more important when the readers come from many different disciplines. Please try to use memorable abbreviations, and define abbreviations when you first use them. Style. The major rule of syntax is this: write so that a reader could parse your sentences -- that is, figure out what modifies what, what is the object of what, and so on -- without understanding what they mean. The syntax should help the reader figure out the meaning; the reader should not need the meaning to decipher the syntax. For example, put ``only' just before what it modifies (``Smith suggested that only men are susceptible to this effect,' not ``Smith only suggested that men ...') to avoid ambiguity of syntax, even if you think the meaning is clear from context. Of course, pay attention to correct usage as well. Make sure you know the rules for using commas; many people do not. (Strunk and White, "The elements of style," provide an excellent review of the roles, as well as many fine suggestions for elegance as well as clarity.) Spellings: "i.e.," and "e.g.," with periods and commas. The word "data" is the plural of "datum," and "media" is the plural of "medium." (I know this is old fashioned, but it will apply here.) Please try to avoid "they" as third-person singular ("the subject read the instructions and then they answered the questions"). It is an old tradition, but it is now overdone. Use plurals whenever possible ("the subjects ... and then they ..."), and otherwise try to use "he or she" or alternate gender. Another overused word is "impact," especially as a verb. You can avoid this by paying attention to the difference between "effect" (n. "result", v. "to bring about") and "affect" (n. "emotion", v. "to cause"). Appendix on Good Scientific Writing Martin E. P. Seligman I've been correcting graduate student papers and editing journal articles for more than twenty-five years. I see the same errors of writing over and over. Here are some to avoid: Vacant Lead Sentences. The first sentences of each section, and the first sentences of each paragraph as well, are the most important sentences. They should state, in plain English, your main points. Then the details can follow. Right: Results. Cognitive therapy prevented relapse better than drug therapy. Drug therapy did better than no therapy at all. Analysis of covariance... Wrong: Results. We performed four analyses of covariance on our data, first transforming them to z scores. We then did paired comparisons using a Bonferroni correction... Qualifiers and Caveats. Don't squander the opportunity to write forcefully by beginning with secondary points and caveats. They belong in the body of the paragraph or section, but not as openers. Distinguish between strong and weak statements. Good scientific writing uses qualifiers and caveats sparingly. Qualifiers apply to marginal results, arguable statements, speculations, and potential artifacts. They do not apply to strong findings, well-confirmed statements, or bedrock theory. "Seem", "appear", "indicate", "may", "suggest" and the like are meaningful verbs. They are not to be used reflexively. Right: Because volume was barely significant, water-deprivation may lower hunger. Electric shock, however, increased hunger two-fold. Wrong: Our findings suggest that electric shock may increase hunger. It also appears that water-deprivation seems to lower hunger. Big words and long sentences. Most readers are busy. Many readers are lazy. Many readers just scan. Help these readers by using short sentences and plain words. Whenever a big word tempts you, look hard for a plain word. Whenever a long sentence tempts you, find a way to break it up. The big word and the long sentence must increase accuracy a lot to make up for impeding reading. Wrong: Thus, by assigning this group to the wait-list condition, treatment effects would not be artificially inflated by including the higher income group with a better prognosis in the initial treatment phase. Right: Richer people have less depression. So we biassed against our hypothesis by putting more of them in the wait-list control. Overwriting. Omit words and ideas that the reader already knows. Overwriting slows the reader down and does not increase accuracy at all. Wrong: The wait list control group, when compared to the attention control group, the drug treatment group and the psychotherapy treament group did worse than the attention control group, and much worse than the experimental drug treatment group and the psychotherapy treatment group. Right: Psychotherapy and drugs did better than attention alone and much better than no treatment. The Royal "We" and the Passive Voice. Poor writers turn to the awkward passive voice to avoid saying "I did such and such". The first person, used sparingly, is fine. Write forcefully and use the active voice whenever you can. Right: I propose that animals can learn about noncontingency and, when they do, they become helpless. Wrong: It is suggested that animals can learn about noncontingency. When noncontingency is learned by an animal, helplessness results. Citations in the middle. Don't break up sentences with citations. This small increase in accuracy slows the reader to a crawl. If you can manage it, group all your citations at the end of the paragraph. Direction of statistical effects. Always state the direction along with its significance. Wrong: The interaction between drug and weight was highly significant (F (2,31)=14.56, p<.001). Right: Small doses of the drug put small rats to sleep right away, while big rats stayed awake even with very large doses (F weightXdose (2,31)=14.56, p<.001). Requirements for articles accepted for publication in Judgment and Decision Making So far we have no charges for authors. This is because I (Jon Baron) do the production, with the help of lots of open-source software (listed below). If you follow these guidelines, I can produce an article while reading it through to make sure it makes sense, something I would do anyway, with little extra time. I can tolerate some deviations from these guidelines, but, if the deviations are major, I will ask you to fix them. You are free to hire someone to help you do this (and this may still cost you less than what other open-access journals charge). Timing: Regular issues of the journal appear every two months starting February. Final versions of articles are due the 15th of the month in which the issue appears. In most cases, when an ariticle is accepted pending revision, the revision (with a letter explaining what was done) is the final version, even if some further editing is required. Style notes Please use APA citation style. (Not the rest of APA style.) This means that articles are cited by author within the text, and citations are alphabetical at the end, with authors initials (not names) following each author's last name (e.g., "McCaffery, E. J., & Baron J. (2006)." --- note the spaces and periods). Volume numbers are in italics following the journal name (also in italics), followed by a comma. No issue numbers. Page numbers are required for everything. Use "and" when citing multiple authors in the text, "et al." for three or more (unless it is important to list all authors), and "&" for citations in parentheses and for authors listed in the reference section. Include an abstract and key words. The title of your article, all article and book titles in the references, all headings and subheadings, and all graph and table labels, use upper case for only: the first letter of the first word, the first word after a colon, proper nouns, and (optionally) names coined in the paper (such as names of variables). Journal titles have all major words begin with upper case. Spellings: "et al.", "etc.", "i.e.", followed by commas if the sentence continues. Don't use "cf." It is better to say, in a couple of words, why you are citing something, e.g., "see X for a review," "for additional supporting results," or "but see X for an opposing perspective." Punctuation: Despite earlier issues of the journal, we now put all punctuation, including commas and periods, outside of quotation marks, unless the punctuation was itself part of the quotation. For additional thoughts about writing style see these recommendations. Graphics Please think about how graphics will fit in a two-column layout. Are they one column or two? Then adjust the font size so that it looks right given the width of the figure (roughly 3 inches for one column, 6 inches for two). For graphs, use vector formats such as eps (Encapulsated PostScript, which is what I use), PostScript (ps), xfig, or svg (scalable vector graphics). These can be re-sized easily. Unfortunately, these formats can include raster (bitmap, non-vector) data, and many proprietary program tend to include these raster images even when they are saved in a vector format. Please send all figures separately (as well as in the document itself). If you have a choice of fonts, please use Helvetica (or, if you have it, Nimbus Sans). Other fonts (aside from Times Roman, Courier, and probably Arial) should be embedded (defined in the file you send). One program that does everything correctly "out of the box" is R, which is what I use when I need to re-draw something. If you use R, send the R code. Stata and Matlab produce good eps output. With SigmaPlot, use the option for "eps" output with "no preview" and "convert to postscript fonts". Some people have had success with Adobe Acrobat: 1., create a Word document with the figure on one page; 2., save as pdf; 3., read the pdf into Adobe Acrobat and save as PostScript. For other images, such as photos, a bitmap (raster) format is necessary (e.g., bmp, png, gif, tiff, jpg). The bigger the better. It is easy to shrink. Hard to expand. Text formats I accept word-processor formats: Open Document Format; OpenOffice Writer; Word Perfect; Microsoft Word (except for docx, the new version); rtf. I prefer text files formatted in LaTeX, especially for articles with a lot of math. See below for special notes about LaTeX or for word processors. This section applies to both methods. Tables. Think about whether a table will fit in one column or two. Do not use sideways tables, or tables wider than a page. Do not try to make the table look nice on a double-spaced one-column manuscript. It will not appear that way. Better to to have an ugly table that is easy to convert. Tables must be text, not images. Apparently these instructions are very difficult for Word users to follow, so the simplest thing might be to submit tables separately in LaTeX format. Do not attempt to control position on the page, except as part of a display (for example, a response scale). Do not control the font style (bold, italic), position (center), or size, with the sole exception of italics and bold in the text itself, for emphasis or math. For sections, subsections, etc., either number them (1, 1.1, 1.1.1) so that I know the level of each or use semantic formating ("heading," "subheading" and so on, which are available on most word processors). Do not try to indicate these with centering, font size, or font style. Do not format the title page. Either use the LaTeX template or follow the instructions at the end of this page. Use " " [space] between authors' initials, e.g., Sorkin, J. M. Do not use single quotes in the text, except between double quotes. Do not use sideways tables, or tables wider than the text on a page. In tables, do not use empty rows or columns Put tables and figures in the text, not at the end. Do not use vertical lines in tables except when reproducing stimulus materials. Use footnotes, not endnotes. Special notes for LaTeX Use LaTeX for formatting if possible. Please use a minumum of additional packages and do not attempt to control positioning, spacing, or width (unless you use the template). Specifically: Use "--" between numbers. Use " --- " (with spaces on both sides) for an em-dash. Use \label and \ref as usual. Do not use longtable or any packages specific to Scientific Workplace. Do not rely on bibTeX; I can't face getting it to work with APA style. A template is here. If you do not use this, then please send the title page separately following the instructions at the end of the section on word processors, below. Every published article has a .tex version. To find it, look at the URL of the html version, replace "htm" or "html" with "tex". Later articles are better examples to imitate (because I'm using Hevea rather than Tth to make the html version). Special notes for word processors The general principle is that I convert these to LaTeX using many wonderful open-source programs (OpenOffice, writer2latex, sed, and hevea for the html). What is easy for these programs and what is easy to read on a printed page are two different things. Remove hidden codes (such as those made by Endnote); CTRL-SHIFT-F9 will do this in Word. Math. Equations, formulas, and other mathematical expressions must be text, not images. Greek letters are fine, so long as they are represented as characters, not pictures of characters. Since 2007, Microsoft Equation Editor makes pictures. Avoid it. (Science suggests using the Mathtype plug-in, or an earlier version of Word.) I don't mind re-writing a few equations, but, if a paper is full of math, it is best to write it with LaTeX formatting from the outset. Alternatively, if all the math is in one section, you can send that separately as a text file using LaTeX math notation. For tables, do not use empty rows or columns, or tables within tables. Do not specify the position of each item within each cell (e.g., center). Use italic and bold fonts sparingly. If you have your table in Excel, please use Excel2LaTeX and send the output separately. If you use R, the xtable packages produces LaTeX tables, so you may send me either the tables or the R code. (Apparently Matlab can also produce LaTeX tables.) To create LaTeX tables with a graphical user interface, you might try TeXTable (apparently for Mac only), Texmaker, or LyX. I would be interested in reports about these tools. The title page should include only the following, in standard font only (e.g., no bold or italics), with no formatting (e.g., centering). A running head. Use upper case only for the first letter of the first word and for proper nouns. The title. Use upper case only for the first letter of the first word and for proper nouns. A list of the authors' names, in order, one per line, first name first. After each author, put numbers in curly braces indicating the author's affiliations, e.g., "Jonathan Baron {1,2}". A list of the meanings of the affiliations, one per line, e.g., "{1} Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania {2} Leonard Davis Institute for Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania". Departments are optional. The acknowledgements, as one paragraph. These include any thanks and also the postal and email address of the corresponding author(s). Some technical details Authors do not need to read this section, but it seems to be a good place to document some of the methods used in production. The basic idea is to produce a .tex file, with settings in the header for two columns and other things like foreign characters, math, and nice tables. To get this from a word-processor document I use (OpenOffice to produce .sxw, then writer2latex to produce .tex. After I fix this up, when everything is final and the proof is approved, I use hevea to produce the html version. When the whole issue is done, I produce files for RePEc, DOAJ, the various indexing organizations, and the rss feed. The table of contents is a by-product of these operations, as is the listing by author. For converting word-processor formats to LaTeX, and LaTeX to html. My notes on LaTeX Batch file to convert .sxw (made by OpenOffice) to .tex, using writer2latex configuration file for writer2latex configuration file for HEVEA (for making html) CSS file for html version For RePEc (Research Papers in Economics), table of contents, citations, and notifications. (Perl scripts by Adam Kramer and Alan Schwartz.) notes on usage Template for 'dat' format Make table of contents Convert 'dat' to APA format Make RePEc 'rdf' format Make 'ris' format Extract abstract from .tex files R script for making rss feed from RePEc rdf R script for DOAJ (and archives) When I need to re-draw figures, I use R. Here are some examples. The numbers are related to the articles. For example, "8221/figs.R" has results in "8221/jdm8221.pdf". Jonathan Baron Last modified: Tue Jul 21 09:35:21 EDT 2009 Editorial Board Editor Jonathan Baron, University of Pennsylvania Associate Editors Rachel Croson, University of Texas at Dallas Robin Hogarth, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Spain Barbara Mellers, University of California, Berkeley Ilana Ritov, Hebrew University of Jerusalem Consulting Editors Hal Arkes, Ohio State University Maya Bar-Hillel, Hebrew University of Jerusalem Max Bazerman, Harvard University Colin Camerer, California Institute of Technology Mandeep Dhami, University of Cambridge Gregory Fischer, Duke University Craig Fox, University of California, Los Angeles Ulrich Hoffrage, University of Lausanne Eric Johnson, Columbia University Daniel Kahneman, Princeton University Simon Kemp, University of Canterbury, N.Z. Derek Koehler, University of Waterloo Jonathan Jay Koehler, Arizona State University David H. Krantz, Columbia University Irwin Levin, University of Iowa Peter McGraw, University of Colorado Jeryl Mumpower, Texas A & M University Ben Newell, University of New South Wales Lisa Ordóñez, University of Arizona Ellen Peters, Decision Research Alan Schwartz, University of Illinois at Chicago Barry Schwartz, Swarthmore College Jean-Robert Tyran, University of Copenhagen Peter Ubel, University of Michigan Elke Weber, Columbia University Marcel Zeelenberg, Tilburg University