Journal of Youth and Adolescence

, Volume 35, Issue 1, pp 1–9 | Cite as

Reporting Empirical Research on Adolescence: Reflections on the Appeal of Coherence, Purpose and Responsibility

  • Roger J. R. Levesque
Original Paper

The study of adolescence has come of age. Many successful journals now provide researchers with a wide variety of reasonable options for contributing to our understanding of adolescents and their place in society. This article explores these options and offers suggestions to prospective authors, especially those who expect to publish in the Journal of Youth and Adolescence (JYA). This article briefly overviews the scope and audiences of the field's leading journals to emphasize the need to select appropriate publishing outlets. The discussion demonstrates how that selection helps determine the eventual success of submitted manuscripts and influences manuscript effectiveness. The analysis then suggests ways to avoid common errors and to write effective, publishable manuscripts that have a sense of purpose and coherence. The article ends by emphasizing the need to write responsibly, in a way that tempers scientific endeavors with a sense of responsibility to adolescents, their lived environments, broader society and the study of adolescence.


adolescence academic writing scientific communication written communication peer evaluation 


  1. American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (effective June 1, 2003). (Retrieved Dec. 1, 2004).Google Scholar
  2. American Psychological Association. (2001). Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, 5th edn., Author, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  3. Bakanic, V., and McPhail, C. (1990). If at first you don't succeed: Review procedures for revised and resubmitted manuscripts. Am. Sociol. 21: 373–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bem, D. J. (2004). Writing the empirical journal article. In Darley, J. M., Zanna, M. P., and Rodiger, H. L., III (eds.), Complete Academic: A Career Guide, 2nd edn., American Psychological Association, Washington, DC, pp. 185–219.Google Scholar
  5. Callaham, M. L., Knopp, R. K., and Gallagher, E. J. (2002). Effect of written feedback by editors on quality of reviews: Two randomized trials. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 287: 2781–2783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Eberley, S., and Warner, W. K. (1990). Fields or subfields of knowledge: Rejection rates and agreement in peer review. Am. Sociol. 21: 217–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Eisenberg, N., Thompson, M. S., Augir, S., and Stanley, E. H. (2002). “Getting in” revisited: An analysis of manuscript characteristics, reviewer's ratings, and acceptance of manuscripts in Psychological Bulletin. Psychol. Bull. 128: 997–1004.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hodges, C. J., Glenn, C., Gray, L., Miller, R. K., and Webb, S. S. (2004). Hodge's Harbrace Handbook (15th ed.). Harcourt College Publishers, New York.Google Scholar
  9. Larson, R., Cauce, A. M., and Umana-Taylor, A. (2004). SRA and Diversity: The Results of a Membership Survey. (Retrieved December 1, 2004).Google Scholar
  10. Lerner, R. M., Fisher, C. B., and Weinberg, R. A. (2000). Toward a science for and of the people: Promoting civil society through the application of developmental science. Child Dev. 71: 11–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Rodgers, R., and Rodgers, N. (1999). The sacred spark of academic research. J. Pub. Admini. Res. Theor. 9: 473–492.Google Scholar
  12. Simon, R. J., and Fyfe, J. J. (1994). Editors and Gatekeepers: Getting Published in the Social Science. Rowan and Littlefield, Lanham, MD.Google Scholar
  13. Sternberg, R. J. (2004). The Psychologist's Companion: A Guide to Scientific Writing for Students and Researchers, 4th edn., Cambridge University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  14. Strunk, W., and White, E. B. (2000). The Elements of Style, 4th edn., University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  15. Tamashiro, D. J., (2003). How to get published: Guidance from journal editors. APS Observ. 16, 27–28.Google Scholar
  16. University of Chicago Press Staff (Ed). (2003). The Chicago Manual of Style, 15th edn., University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  17. Wilkinson, L., and Task Force on Statistical Inference. (1999). Statistical methods in psychology journals: Guidelines and explanations. Am. Psychol. 54: 594–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Williams, J. M. (1990). Style: Writing Toward Clarity and Grace. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Indiana UniversityBloomingtonU.S.

Personalised recommendations