Biological Psychology (BIOL PSYCHOL)

Publisher: Elsevier

Journal description

Biological Psychology publishes original scientific papers on the biological aspects of psychological states and processes. Biological aspects include electrophysiology and biochemical assessments during psychological experiments as well as biologically induced changes in psychological function. Psychological investigations based on biological theories are also of interest. All aspects of psychological functioning, to include psychopathology, are germane. The Journal concentrates on work with human subjects, but welcomes work with animal subjects conceptually related to issues in human biological psychology. Empirical reports are the core of the Journal but review articles as well as technical notes relevant to biological psychology are encouraged. A brief report section will publish well written papers of less than 900 words with minimal delays from the submission date. Book reports and critical commentary of relevance to our readership are also published. Finally, announcements are provided particularly of national and international meetings of interest to our readership.

Current impact factor: 3.40

Impact Factor Rankings

2016 Impact Factor Available summer 2017
2014 / 2015 Impact Factor 3.403
2013 Impact Factor 3.473
2012 Impact Factor 3.399
2011 Impact Factor 3.225
2010 Impact Factor 3.348
2009 Impact Factor 4.363
2008 Impact Factor 3.686
2007 Impact Factor 2.715
2006 Impact Factor 2.698
2005 Impact Factor 3
2004 Impact Factor 1.637
2003 Impact Factor 2.128
2002 Impact Factor 2.435
2001 Impact Factor 1.778
2000 Impact Factor 1.5
1999 Impact Factor 1.474
1998 Impact Factor 1.8
1997 Impact Factor 1.056
1996 Impact Factor 1.026

Impact factor over time

Impact factor

Additional details

5-year impact 3.95
Cited half-life 7.00
Immediacy index 0.84
Eigenfactor 0.01
Article influence 1.27
Website Biological Psychology website
Other titles Biological psychology (Online)
ISSN 0301-0511
OCLC 38840588
Material type Document, Periodical, Internet resource
Document type Internet Resource, Computer File, Journal / Magazine / Newspaper

Publisher details


  • Pre-print
    • Author can archive a pre-print version
  • Post-print
    • Author can archive a post-print version
  • Conditions
    • Authors pre-print on any website, including arXiv and RePEC
    • Author's post-print on author's personal website immediately
    • Author's post-print on open access repository after an embargo period of between 12 months and 48 months
    • Permitted deposit due to Funding Body, Institutional and Governmental policy or mandate, may be required to comply with embargo periods of 12 months to 48 months
    • Author's post-print may be used to update arXiv and RepEC
    • Publisher's version/PDF cannot be used
    • Must link to publisher version with DOI
    • Author's post-print must be released with a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives License
    • Publisher last reviewed on 03/06/2015
  • Classification

Publications in this journal

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Alcohol-approach tendencies have been associated with heavy drinking and play a role in the transition to alcohol abuse. Such cognitive biases might predict future alcohol use better under a low dose of alcohol. The aim of this prospective study was to investigate both the magnitude and the predictive power of alcohol-induced changes on approach-avoidance bias and bias-related cortical asymmetries during response preparation across heavy and light drinking adolescents. In heavy drinking adolescents greater approach-related asymmetry index in the beta-band was observed for soft-drink cues compared to alcohol ones and this increase was associated with increase in difficulty to regulate alcohol intake. Earlier findings demonstrated that young heavy drinkers hold both positive and negative implicit alcohol associations, reflecting an ambiguity towards alcohol. The increase in approach related beta-lateralization for soft-drink cues measured in this study may represent a compensatory effort for the weaker S-R mapping (approaching soft drink). The MRAA findings in this study may highlight a mechanism related to overcompensation due to ambivalent attitudes towards drinking in our heavy drinking sample who had greater problems to limit their alcohol intake compared to light drinkers. Moreover, a relatively strong approach soft-drink and weak approach alcohol reaction-time bias after alcohol predicted decreasing drinking; suggesting that the capacity to control the bias under alcohol could be a protective factor.
    No preview · Article · Jun 2015 · Biological Psychology