Submission Preflight (psychbull-submission)
The last check before pressing submit on APA Editorial Manager. Psychological Bulletin uses
masked review, so the most common avoidable failure is an under-masked manuscript — and the second
is a synthesis whose MARS/PRISMA reporting is incomplete. Verify volatile specifics on the official APA
page before relying on them.
When to trigger
- "Submitting tomorrow" — last pass before upload
- Unsure which files/metadata Editorial Manager expects
- Confirming masking, the abstract cap, and the MARS/PRISMA checklist are satisfied
Process facts (verify volatile items on the official page)
-
Owner / publisher: American Psychological Association (APA).
-
Portal: APA Editorial Manager (
editorialmanager.com/bul).
-
Review model: masked — author identity withheld from reviewers; no author clues in the file.
-
What it publishes: research syntheses (systematic reviews, meta-analyses, meta-reviews,
meta-synthesis, qualitative reviews) — not original primary studies; original theory →
Psychological Review.
-
Abstract: ≤ 250 words, on a separate page.
-
Style: APA Publication Manual, 7th edition.
-
Reporting: MARS (meta-analysis) · PRISMA (systematic review) · JARS (quant/mixed).
-
Transparency: state preregistration + where; supply database, codebook, scripts (TOP, since
Feb 1 2022 — 待核实 exact level).
-
Fee: no submission fee stated (待核实; confirm any post-acceptance OA APC).
Preflight checklist
Fit & type
Masking
Reporting & format
Transparency & compliance
Anti-patterns
- Author identifiers left in text, acknowledgments, or file metadata (breaks masking)
- A PROSPERO number visible in the masked appendix
- Abstract over 250 words
- Submitting an original empirical study or pure theory to the wrong venue
- Missing MARS/PRISMA checklist or an undeposited database
Desk-reject patterns at the APA review flagship
Most avoidable failures at Psychological Bulletin are caught before peer review — at the editor's desk.
The recurring desk-reject patterns at the APA's flagship synthesis journal:
| Desk-reject pattern |
Why it triggers |
Pre-submission fix |
| Wrong venue |
A primary empirical study or pure theory was submitted |
Confirm it is a synthesis; route theory to Psychological Review |
| Broken masking |
Author names, affiliations, or file metadata remain |
Strip identifiers from text and document properties |
| Visible registration |
PROSPERO number/names left in the masked appendix |
Anonymize the appendix before upload |
| Over-long abstract |
Abstract exceeds 250 words |
Trim to the cap on a separate page |
| Missing reporting |
No MARS/PRISMA/JARS checklist or PRISMA diagram |
Complete the checklist for the synthesis type |
| No deposited data |
"Available on request" instead of a DOI'd package |
Deposit database, codebook, scripts before submitting |
Worked vignette — the final preflight pass
Illustrative figures only. The self-affirmation synthesis (k = 42, g = 0.34) clears preflight when:
-
Fit is confirmed as a meta-analysis of existing trials, not new data.
-
Masking is verified in the text, the neutralized self-citations, the stripped file metadata, and
the anonymized OSF/PROSPERO appendix.
-
Abstract is 218 words on its own page, stating k, the pooled g and CI, the moderator, and the
robustness bottom line.
-
Reporting: the MARS and PRISMA checklists are complete and the PRISMA diagram plus forest/funnel
exhibits are attached.
-
Transparency: the deposited database, codebook, and scripts carry a DOI and the availability
statement is drafted. (Confirm the current TOP level and any APC on the official APA page.)
Referee/editor pushback → venue-specific fix
-
"This appears to be a primary study." → Reframe only if it genuinely synthesizes a literature;
otherwise it is the wrong journal.
-
"Reviewer could infer the authors." → Remove residual self-references and metadata; re-anonymize the
registration appendix.
-
"MARS checklist is missing." → Attach the completed checklist matched to the synthesis type before
resubmitting.
Output format
【Fit】synthesis, not primary study/theory? [Y/N]
【Type】meta-analysis / systematic / meta-review / qualitative
【Masked】text + self-refs + metadata + PROSPERO appendix clean? [Y/N]
【Abstract】word count (≤ 250)
【MARS/PRISMA/JARS】checklist complete? [Y/N]
【Transparency】database+codebook+scripts deposited + prereg stated? [Y/N]
【Next】await decision → psychbull-rebuttal on R&R
Supplementary resources