Standards for the preparation and writing of Psychology review articles

Referencias bibliográficas

• American Psychological Association (2002). Manual de estilo de publicaciones de la American Psychological Association (2ª ed.). México: Manual Moderno. (Orig 2001).
• APA Presidential Task Force on Evidence-Based Practice (2006). Evidence-based practice in psychology. American Psychologist, 61, 271-285.
• APA Publication and Communications Board Working Group in Journal Article Reporting Standards (2008). Reporting standars for research in Psychology. Why do we need them? What might they be? American Psychologist, 63, 839-851.
• Ardila, R. (2002). La Psicología en el futuro. Madrid: Pirámide.
• Ardila, R. (2006). The experimental synthesis of behaviour. International Journal of Psychology, 41, 462-467.
• Ardila, R. (2007). The nature of Psychology: The great dilemmas. American Psychologist, 64, 904-912.
• Bem, D.J. (1995). Writing a review article for Psychological Bulletin. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 172-177.
• Benjamin, L.T. (Eds.) (2008). Favorite activities for the teaching of psychology. Washington: APA Press.
• Bensley, A. (2008). Can you learn to think more like a psychologist? Teach & Learn, 21, 128-129.
• Bobenrieth, M. (2002). Normas para la revisión de artículos originales en ciencias de la salud. International Journal of Clinical and Heatlh Psychology, 2, 509-523.
• Botella, J. and Gambara, H. (2006). Doing and reporting a meta-analysis. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 6, 425-440.
• Bourdieu, P. (2003). El oficio del científico. Barcelona: Anagrama. (Trabajo original publicado en 2002).
• Brun, G., Kuenzle, D., and Dogouglu, U. (Eds.) (2008). Epistemology and emotions. London: Ashgate.
• Bruner, J. (1985). En busca de la mente. México: Fondo de Cultura Económica. (Trabajo original publicado en 1983).
• Buela-Casal, G. (Ed.) (2005). Manual práctico para hacer un doctorado. Madrid: EOS Universitaria.
• Buela-Casal, G. and Sierra, J.C. (2002). Normas para la redacción de casos clínicos. International Journal of Clinical and Heatlh Psychology, 2, 525-532.
• Buela-Casal, G., Zych, I., Medina, A., Viedma del Jesús, M.I., Lozano, S., and Torres, G. (2009). Analysis of the influence of the two types of the journal articles, theoretical and empirical on the impact factor of a journal. Scioentometrics, 80, 267-284.
• Buela-Casal, G., Zych, I., Sierra, J.C., and Bermúdez, M.P. (2007). The Internationality Index of the Spanish Psychology journals. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 7, 899-910.
• Carretero-Dios, H. and Pérez, C. (2007). Standards for the development and review of instrumental studies: Considerations about test selection in psychological research. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 7, 863-882.
• Cooper, H.M. (2009). Research synthesis and meta-analysis: A step by step approach (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
• Cooper, H., Hedges, L.V. y Valentine, J.C. (Eds.) (2009). The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (2nd ed.). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
• Delgado Sánchez-Mateos, J. (2007). El lenguaje no es neutral. Comentarios sobre el estilo APA. Psicothema, 19, 302-307.
• Dunn, D.S., Halonen, J.S., and Smith, R.A. (2008). Teaching critical thinking in psychology. A handbook of best practice. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
• Dunn, D.S., McCarthy, M.A., Baker, S., Halonen, J.S., and Hill, G.W. (2007). Quality benchmarks in undergraduate psychology programs. American Psychologist, 62, 650-670.
• Feist, G.J. (2006). The psychology of science and the origins of the scientific mind. New Haven: Yale University Press.
• Fisher, K. and Julien, H. (2009). Information behavior. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 43, 317-358.
• Garfield, E. (2003). The meaning of the impact factor. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 3, 363-369.
• Guastello, S.J., Koopmans, M., and Pincus, D. (2008). Chaos and complexity in psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Higgins, J.P.T. and Green, S. (Eds.) (2008). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
• Hyman, R. (1995). How to critique a published article. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 178-182.
• Kligyte, V., Marcy, R.T., Sevier, S.T., Godfrey, E.S., and Mumford, M.D. (2008). A qualitative approach to responsble conduct of research (RCR) training developemnt: Identification of matacognitive strategies. Science and Engineering Ethics, 14, 3-31.
• Knorr-Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic cultures. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
• Koselleck, R. (1993). Futuro Pasado. Para una semántica de los tiempos históricos. Barcelona: Paidós. (Orig. 1965-1977).
• Kruglanski, A.W., Pierro, A., Mannetti, L., and De Grada, E. (2006). Groups as epistemic providers: Need for closure and the unfolding of group-centrism. Psicological Review, 113, 84-100.
• Kuhn, T.S. (2006). La estructura de las revoluciones científicas. México. Fondo de Cultura Económica. (Orig. 1962).
• León, O.G. (2005). Cómo redactar textos científicos en psicología y educación. Madrid: Netbiblo.
• Macpherson, R. and Stanovich, K.E. (2007). Cognitiva ability, thinking dispositions and instructional set as predictors of critical thinking. Learning and Individual Differences, 17, 115-127.
• Mathiesen, K. (2007) (Ed.). Introduction to special issue of Social Epistemology on «Collective knowledge and collective knowers» (Special issue). Social Epistemology, 21 (3).
• Maxwell, S.E. and Cole, D.A. (1995). Tips for writing (and reading) methodological articles. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 193-198.
• McGee, R., Almquist, J., Keller, J., and Jacobsen, S.J. (2008). Teaching and learning responsible research conduct: Influences of prior experiences on acceptance of new ideas. Accountability in Research, 15, 30-62.
• McGuire, W.J. (1997). Creative hypothesis generating in psychology: Some usefull heuristics. Annual Review of Psychology, 48, 1-30.
• Meehl, P.E. (1990). Why summaries of research on psychological theories are often uninterpretable. Psychological Reports, 66, 195-244.
• Montero, I. and León, O.G. (2007). A guide for naming research studies in Psychology. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 7, 847-862.
• Mullen, P.D. and Ramírez, G. (2006). The promise and pitfalls of systematic reviews. Annual review of Public Health, 27, 81-102.
• Nersessian, N.J. (2008). Creating scientific concepts. Massachusets: MIT Press.
• Oliver, S., Harden, A., Rees, R., Shepherd, J., Brunton, G., Garcia, J., and Oakley, A. (2005). An emerging framework for including different types of evidence in systematic reviews for public policy. Evaluation, 11, 428-446.
• Pérez Álvarez, M. (1992). Individuo, sociedad y psicología. Madrid: Siglo XXI.
• Platón (1986). Banquete. Madrid: Gredos.
• Ramón y Cajal, S. (2005). Reglas y consejos sobre investigación científica. Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas. (Orig. 1899).
• Ramos-Álvarez, M., Moreno-Fernández, M.M., Valdés-Conroy, B., and Catena, A. (2008). Criteria of the peer review process for publication of experimental and quasi-experimental research in Psychology: A guide for creating research papers. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 8, 751-764.
• Rehg, W. (2009). Cogent science in context. Massachusets: MIT Press.
• Rieh, S.Y. and Danielson, D.R. (2008). Credibility: A multidisciplinary framework. Annual review of Information Science and Technology, 41, 307-364.
• Rosenthal, R. (1995). Writing meta-analytic reviews. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 183-192.
• Ruiz-Pérez, R., Delgado, E., and Jiménez-Contreras, E. (2006). Criterios del Institute for Scientific Information para la selección de revistas científicas. Su aplicación a las revistas españolas: metodología e indicadores. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 6, 401-424.
• Saracevic, T. (2007a). Relevance: A review of the literature and a framework for thinking on the notion in information science. Part II: nature and manifestations of relevance. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58, 1915-1933.
• Saracevic, T. (2007b). Relevance: A review of the literature and a framework for thinking on the notion in information science. Part III: Behavior and effects of relevance. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58, 2126-2144.
• Silvia, P.J. (2006). Exploring the psychology of interest. New York. Oxford University Press.
• Simonton, D.K. (2002). Great psychologists and their times. Washington: APA Press.
• Slife, B.D., Reber, J.S., and Richardson, F.C. (Eds.) (2005). Critical thinking about psychology. Washington: APA Press.
• Sokal, A. and Bricmont, J. (1999). Imposturas intelectuales. Barcelona: Paidós. (Orig. 1997).
• Sternberg, R.J. (1991). Editorial. Psychological Bulletin, 109, 3-4.
• Sternberg, R.J.(1995). Editorial. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 171.
• Sternberg, R.J. (1996). Investigar en Psicología. Barcelona: Paidós. (Orig. 1988).
• Sternberg, R.J. (Ed.) (2005). Unity in psychology: Possibility or pipedream? Washington: APA Press.
• Sternberg, R.J. (Ed.) (2006). Reviewing scientific works in psychology. Washington: APA Press.
• Sternberg, R.J., Roediger III, H.L., and Halpern, D.F. (Eds.) (2007). Critical thinking in psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Thagard, P. (2007). Coherence, truth and the development of scientific knowledge. Philosophy of Science, 74, 28-47.
• Thagard, P. and Litt, A. (2008). Models of scientific explanation. In R. Sun (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of computational psychology (pp. 549-564). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• van Drie and van Boxtel, C. (2008). Historical reasoning: Towards a framework for analizing student’s reasoning about the past. Educational Psychology Review, 20, 87-110.
• van Eemeren, F., Grootendorst, R., and Henkemans, F.S. (2006). Argumentación. Buenos Aires: Biblos. (Orig. 2003).
• van Eemeren, F.H. and Houtlosser, P. (2006). Strategic maneuvering: A synthetic recapitulation. Argumentation, 20, 381-392.
• Verhoeven, J. and Perfetti, C. (Eds.) (2008). Advances in text comprehension: Model, process and development (Special Issue). Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22 (3).
• Virués-Ortega, J. and Moreno-Rodríguez, R. (2008). Guidelines for clinical case reports in behavioral clinical Psychology. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 8, 765-777.
• Wester, K.L., Willse, J.T., and Davis, M.S. (2008). Responsible conduct of research measure: Initial development and pilot study. Accountability in Research, 15, 87-104.
• Yanchar, S.C., Slife, B.D., and Warne, R. (2008). Critical thinking as disciplinary practice. Review of General Psychology, 12, 265-281.
• Zych, I. and Buela-Casal, G. (2007). Análisis comparativo de los valores en el Índice de Internacionalidad de las revistas iberoamericanas de Psicología incluidas en la Web of Science. Revista Mexicana de Psicología, 24, 7-14.