Psychological Bulletin (PSYCHOL BULL)

Publisher: American Psychological Association; American Psychological Association, American Psychological Association

Journal description

Psychological Bulletin publishes evaluative and integrative research reviews and interpretations of issues in scientific psychology. Primary research is reported only for illustrative purposes. Integrative reviews or research syntheses focus on empirical studies and seek to summarize past research by drawing overall conclusions from many separate investigations that address related or identical hypotheses. A research synthesis typically presents the authors' assessments of (a) the state of knowledge concerning the relations of interest, (b) critical assessments of the strengths and weaknesses in past research, and (c) important issues that research has left unresolved, thereby directing future research so it can yield a maximum amount of new information. Both cumulative and historical approaches (i.e., ones that organize a research literature by highlighting temporally unfolding developments in a field) can be used. Integrative research reviews that develop connections between areas of research are particularly valuable. Manuscripts dealing with topics at the interface of psychological sciences and society are welcome, as are evaluations of applied psychological therapies, programs, and interventions. Expository articles may be published if they are deemed accurate, broad, clear, and pertinent. Methodological articles that previously were submitted to Psychological Bulletin should now be submitted to Psychological Methods. Original theoretical articles should be submitted to Psychological Review, even when they include summaries of research. Research syntheses should be submitted to Psychological Bulletin even when they develop integrated theoretical statements.

Current impact factor: 14.76

Impact Factor Rankings

2015 Impact Factor Available summer 2016
2014 Impact Factor 14.756
2013 Impact Factor 14.392
2012 Impact Factor 15.575
2011 Impact Factor 14.457
2010 Impact Factor 11.975
2009 Impact Factor 12.854
2008 Impact Factor 12.568
2007 Impact Factor 10.905
2006 Impact Factor 12.725
2005 Impact Factor 9.746
2004 Impact Factor 7.701
2003 Impact Factor 8.405
2002 Impact Factor 7.011
2001 Impact Factor 6.807
2000 Impact Factor 6.913
1999 Impact Factor 7.79
1998 Impact Factor 6.346
1997 Impact Factor 6.038
1996 Impact Factor 6.591
1995 Impact Factor 6.966
1994 Impact Factor 6.697
1993 Impact Factor 5.197
1992 Impact Factor 4.958

Impact factor over time

Impact factor

Additional details

5-year impact 22.16
Cited half-life >10.0
Immediacy index 3.28
Eigenfactor 0.03
Article influence 10.08
Website Psychological Bulletin website
Other titles Psychological bulletin
ISSN 0033-2909
OCLC 1681351
Material type Periodical, Internet resource
Document type Journal / Magazine / Newspaper, Internet Resource

Publisher details

American Psychological Association

  • Pre-print
    • Author can archive a pre-print version
  • Post-print
    • Author can archive a post-print version
  • Conditions
    • Authors' pre-print on a web-site
    • Authors' pre-print must be labeled with date and accompanied with statement that paper has not (yet) been published
    • Copy of authors final peer-reviewed manuscript as accepted for publication
    • Authors' post-print on author's web-site, employers server or institutional repository, after acceptance
    • Publisher copyright and source must be acknowledged
    • Must link to APA journal home page or article DOI
    • Article must include the following statement: 'This article may not exactly replicate the final version published in the APA journal. It is not the copy of record.'
    • Publisher's version/PDF cannot be used
    • APA will submit NIH author articles to PubMed Central, after author completion of form
  • Classification

Publications in this journal

  • Psychological Bulletin 01/2012;
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In an integrative review, we concluded that implicit affective cues—rudimentary stimuli associated with the onset of arousing positive or negative emotional states and/or with appraisals that the environment is benign or threatening—automatically moderate the scope of attention by Friedman & Förster (see record 2010-17510-008). In their comment, Harmon-Jones, Gable, and Price (see record 2011-08310-001) contended that their own recent research, aimed at demonstrating that motivational intensity moderates the relationship between affective state and attentional tuning, requires a tempering of our conclusions. However, Harmon-Jones et al. portrayed these conclusions neither accurately nor comprehensively and offered an insufficient critical assessment of their own competing account. More important, they failed to establish a compelling alternative explanation for the multitude of specific findings we reviewed (Friedman & Förster, 2010). Therefore, although the work of Harmon-Jones et al. is provocative, it leaves critical issues unresolved and does not yet demand a reconsideration of either our basic assumptions or our overall conclusions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
    Psychological Bulletin 04/2011; 137(3):513-516. DOI:10.1037/a0023088