Teaching of Psychology

After fully reviewing the submission guidelines, visit the ToP submission site to submit.

Table of Contents

1. What do we publish?

2. Editorial policies

3. Publishing policies

4. Preparing your manuscript for submission

5. Submitting your manuscript

6. On acceptance and publication

7. SoTL Writing Workshop

8. Further information

1. What do we publish?

1.1 Aims & Scope

Psychology courses are among the most popular classes on college campuses and a rapidly growing addition to high school curriculums. Teaching of Psychology (ToP) is devoted to improving the teaching and learning processes in psychology at all educational levels, from high school through undergraduate- and graduate-level. ToP is indispensable as a source book for teaching methods and as a forum for new ideas. Dedicated to improving the learning and teaching process at all educational levels, this journal has established itself as a leading source of information and inspiration for all who teach psychology. Coverage includes empirical research on teaching and learning; studies of teacher or student characteristics; subject matter or content reviews for class use; investigations of student, course, or teacher assessment; professional problems of teachers; essays on teaching; innovative course descriptions and evaluations; curriculum designs; bibliographic material; demonstrations and laboratory projects; and news items.

1.2 Article Types

Teaching of Psychology is devoted to improvement of the teaching and learning processes at all educational levels from secondary school through college and graduate school to continuing education. The journal includes empirical research on teaching and learning of psychological concepts and theories; studies of teacher or student characteristics subject matter or content reviews for the psychology class; investigations of psychology student, course, or teacher assessment; professional problems of psychology teachers; innovative psychology course descriptions and evaluation; curriculum designs; and demonstrations and laboratory projects. For most submissions, authors should ideally include empirical assessment of the contribution. The empirical assessment should primarily and directly measure the impact of the technique on the student learning rather than focus predominantly on student self-report of learning. All submissions should explicitly demonstrate how the research is relevant to psychology educators and/or students.

The journal includes four major types of articles: (1) pilot and small-scale studies, (2) conceptual and methodological empirical replications, (3) full-length empirical studies and integrative pieces, and (4) evidence-based strategies for teaching of psychology.

Here are specific details on each of the four major types of articles the journal will consider. For guidance about which section your paper best fits, please contact the editor Aaron S. Richmond at top@teachpsych.org.

Proof of Concept Corner: This section will house promising pilot studies or small-scale studies. Submissions to this Corner should be shorter articles that provide quantitative evidence for teaching and learning related interventions, establish associations between variables related to the teaching of psychology, and/or present descriptive data to propose problems to solve. It is highly encouraged that they contain OSF Materials, Data, and/or Preregistration. They must be:

1. The manuscript should be no more than 4,500 words. This includes the title page, abstract, main body of the manuscript, references, tables, figures, and appendices. 
2. Data-driven.
3. Novel.

Previously published ToP examples:

Rogers, S. L., Hollett, R., Li, Y. R., & Speelman, C. P. (2022). An evaluation of virtual reality role-play experiences for helping-profession courses. Teaching of Psychology, 49(1), 78-84. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628321995431

Ober, T. M. (2021). The use of a digital pedagogical tool to support writing instruction in the social sciences. Teaching of Psychology, 48(4), 300-307. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628320979900

The Replication Corner: As there is a growing concern for replication of studies in psychology, and ToP is committed to improving our science in this regard. Therefore, ToP encourages the publication of replication studies. In this section, we encourage authors to not only replicate findings from previously published studies, but also to include some novel aspect to their study (e.g., different type of institution, psychology subject matter, class size, additional measures, etc.). Submissions in this section must:

1. Be data driven.
2. Be small- or large-scale studies.
3. Be no more than a total of 4,500 words or commensurate with the original article. This includes the title page, abstract, main body of the manuscript, references, tables, figures, and appendices.
4. Attempt to replicate previously published work on any subject, population, or outlet (e.g., PLAT, SOTLP, TEPP, SoTL journal).
5. Have implications for practical teaching, curricular, programmatic, or advising responsibilities.

Previously published ToP examples:

Friedrich, J., Childress, J., & Cheng, D. (2018). Replicating a national survey on statistical training in undergraduate psychology programs: Are there “new statistics” in the new millennium? Teaching of Psychology, 45, 312–323. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628318796414

Reich, C. M., LaCaille, L. J., Axford, K. E., & Slaughter, N. R. (2022). Empathic communication skills across applied undergraduate psychology courses: A replication study. Teaching of Psychology, 49(1), 49-56. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628321995431

The Science of Teaching and Learning Corner:  Submissions to this corner should be full-length articles that are data- or theory-driven, meta-analytic investigations, or conceptual position articles.  Submissions to this section are meant to illuminate teaching of psychology topics with broad implications or importance to SoTL researchers. They may be:

1. The manuscript should be no more than a total of 8,500 words. This includes the title page, abstract, main body of the manuscript, references, tables, figures, and appendices. 
2. Integrative literature reviews.
3. Full studies (i.e., not short pilot studies), multiple experiment manuscripts, large meta-analytic reviews, etc.
4. Op-ed articles. For example, pros and cons of moving a psych major from BA to BS, changing the experimental sequence, how to get students more interested in research, career advice, etc.

Previously published ToP examples:

Nusbaum, A. T., Swindell, S., & Plemons, A. (2021). Kindness at first sight: The role of syllabi in impression formation. Teaching of Psychology, 48(2), 130-143. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628320959953

Wei, Y., Spencer-Rodgers, J., Anderson, E., & Peng, K. (2021). The effects of a cross-cultural psychology course on perceived intercultural competence. Teaching of Psychology, 48(3), 221-227 https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628320977273

The Scholarly Teacher Corner: This corner is meant to provide a forum for shorter articles that provide practical reviews, activities, small-scale studies and/or resources for teachers of psychology to directly use in their classroom or teaching responsibilities. They can be small-scale studies, reflective essays, practical activities, nondata driven emerging ideas, subject specific (e.g., abnormal, developmental, etc.) papers, ideas on how to incorporate a book into your course, research reviews that illuminate findings for teachers of psychology, translations of new research, major issues to consider, etc. Articles in this corner should:

1. Provide practical hands on advice for teachers.
2. Be based on past research or evidence.
3. The manuscript should be no more than 4,000 words. This includes the title page, abstract, main body of the manuscript, references, tables, figures, and appendices. 
4. Include instructional materials on Open Science Framework (OSF) Materials or Figshare. Possible Appendices (for online materials or OSF) that provide the actual activities or course materials. SAGE is a partner of Figshare, the industry leading open repository of research data. This helps us improve the discoverability of supplementary data we publish, as well as support the visualization of this data online. There’s no limit to each article’s accompanying supplementary data, and it’s free to access on SAGE Journals as well as on the Figshare platform. Here are some related links: https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/press/sage-publishing-partners-with-figshare-to-support-wider-access-to-article-supplemental or https://sage.figshare.com/ 

Previously published ToP examples:

Garlington, T., Ryan, V. M., Nolty, C., Ilagan, H., & Kunicki, Z. J. (2021). Bringing social justice into the statistics classroom. Teaching of Psychology, 48(3), 269-274. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628320979879

Koch, M. K., & Mendle, J. (2021). Real-world skills in a virtual world: An innovative activity for teaching developmental Psychopathology. Teaching of Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1177/00986283211042309

Teaching of Psychology welcomes Special Issues. Special Issues in ToP should be concentrated on one topic or issue. For example, in 2018, we published a special issue devoted to professional development in undergraduate psychology majors (see Volume 45, Issue 1).  For each Special Issue, there will be at least one guest editor who is in charge of soliciting manuscripts, editing manuscripts, and submitting the Special Issue to the ToP Editor. Once the issue has been formed, each article will go under the double-blind peer review process. The Editor and Associate Editors will provide guidance to the guest editor during he process. Guest editor(s) must select and advertise solicitation of manuscripts publicly and in an open manner (e.g., soliciting manuscripts via the Society of Teaching of Psychology’s list serv).  

To submit a proposal (no more than two pages) for a special issue, guest editors must:

• Provide a description of the topic of the special issue, how it adds value to the teaching of psychology, including its importance to teachers.
• A description of how the guest editor(s) will solicit manuscripts. For example, how will the solicitation of manuscripts be publicized, and to whom?
• Timeline of the special issue. Ideally, we would want a targeted volume and issue number for the special issue. This includes when manuscripts will be solicited, reviewed, revised, edited, and submitted to ToP.
• A list of at least 10 potential peer reviewers.
• Submit the proposal to the Editor, Aaron S. Richmond at top@teachpsych.org

1.3 Writing your paper

The SAGE Author Gateway has some general advice and on how to get published, plus links to further resources. SAGE Author Services also offers authors a variety of ways to improve and enhance their article including English language editing, plagiarism detection, and video abstract and infographic preparation.

1.3.1 Make your article discoverable

When writing up your paper, think about how you can make it discoverable. The title, keywords and abstract are key to ensuring readers find your article through search engines such as Google. For information and guidance on how best to title your article, write your abstract and select your keywords, have a look at this page on the Gateway: How to Help Readers Find Your Article Online.

2. Editorial policies

2.1 Peer-review policy

SAGE does not permit the use of author-suggested (recommended) reviewers at any stage of the submission process, be that through the web-based submission system or other communication. 
Reviewers should be experts in their fields and should be able to provide an objective assessment of the manuscript. Our policy is that reviewers should not be assigned to a paper if:

• The reviewer is based at the same institution as any of the co-authors
• The reviewer is based at the funding body of the paper
• The author has recommended the reviewer
• The reviewer has provided a personal (e.g. Gmail/Yahoo/Hotmail) email account and an institutional email account cannot be found after performing a basic Google search (name, department, and institution). 

2.2 Authorship

All parties who have made a substantive contribution to the article should be listed as authors. Principal authorship, authorship order, and other publication credits should be based on the relative scientific or professional contributions of the individuals involved, regardless of their status. See APA Guidelines for Authorship. A student is usually listed as the principal author on any multiple-authored publication that substantially derives from the student’s dissertation or thesis.

Please note that AI chatbots, for example ChatGPT, should not be listed as authors. For more information see the policy on Use of ChatGPT and generative AI tools.

2.3 Acknowledgements

All contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be listed in an Acknowledgements section. Examples of those who might be acknowledged include a person who provided purely technical help, or a department chair who provided only general support.

Please supply any personal acknowledgments separately to the main text to facilitate anonymous peer review.

2.3.1 Third-party submissions

Where an individual who is not listed as an author submits a manuscript on behalf of the author(s), a statement must be included in the Acknowledgements section of the manuscript and in the accompanying cover letter. The statements must:

• Disclose this type of editorial assistance – including the individual’s name, company, and level of input
• Identify any entities that paid for this assistance
• Confirm that the listed authors have authorized the submission of their manuscript via third party and approved any statements or declarations, e.g. conflicting interests, funding, etc.

Where appropriate, SAGE reserves the right to deny consideration to manuscripts submitted by a third party rather than by the authors themselves.

2.3.2 Writing assistance

Individuals who provided writing assistance, e.g. from a specialist communications company, do not qualify as authors and so should be included in the Acknowledgements section. Authors must disclose any writing assistance – including the individual’s name, company, and level of input – and identify the entity that paid for this assistance. It is not necessary to disclose the use of language polishing services.

2.4 Declaration of conflicting interests

Teaching of Psychology encourages authors to include a declaration of any conflicting interests and recommends you review the good practice guidelines on the SAGE Journal Author Gateway.

2.5 Preregistration, Transparency, and Open Science

Teaching of Psychology is committed to promoting transparent, open, rigorous research. The following procedures are part of the submission process:

2.5.1 Disclosures. As part of the submission procedures, authors will be asked to confirm the following (even though not all apply to all types of research designs):

1. You included a clear statement of how the sample size was determined
2. You included a statement of a priori statistical power based on reasonable effect size (quantitative studies) or how you ensured saturation of depth and breadth of themes (qualitative studies)
3. You included a description of all data exclusions (e.g., outliers), how the decisions about exclusions were made, and have conducted all analyses with and without the exclusions
4. You included a description of all data transformations, how the decisions about transformations were made, and have conducted all analyses with both the transformed and raw data
5. You included a rationale for including covariates and tested all models with and without covariates included
6. All measures and questions relevant to the research question contained in the project were included in the manuscript
7. You included a clear statement of the amount, type, and method of handling missing data
8. You included effect sizes for all statistical tests
9. All research questions and hypotheses are clearly and accurately labeled as either exploratory or confirmatory
10. You included rationale for any deviations from standard scoring procedures of measures
11. You included, as an appendix or supplement, a detailed description of the interview questions asked
12. You included a detailed description of your qualitative coding/analysis process
13. You included an assessment of coding trustworthiness, either quantitative or qualitative

These items are presented as a checklist in the submission portal, with authors actively confirming adherence to each practice. A separate statement for disclosures is not required but authors can choose to include one in the manuscript if they wish (e.g., the 21-word solution; Simmons, Nelson, & Simonsohn, 2012).

2.5.2 Transparency and Open Science Statement. As part of the submission process, authors must include a Transparency and Open Science Statement. This statement will be included as part of the peer-review process and will ultimately appear in the Author Note section of accepted manuscripts. The Transparency and Openness Statement must indicate the following:

1. Are the raw data contained in this manuscript openly available for download?
   1. If yes, did you include a DOI or other persistent identifier in the manuscript?
2. For quantitative analyses, is the analysis code/syntax used for the analyses openly available for download?
   1. If yes, did you include a DOI or other persistent identifier in the manuscript?
3. For qualitative analyses, are the list of questions and coding manuals openly available for download?
   1. If yes, did you include a DOI or other persistent identifier in the manuscript?
4. Are all materials used in the study openly available for download?
   1. If yes, did you include a DOI or other persistent identifier in the manuscript?
5. Did this study include a pre-registration plan for data collection and/or analysis?
   1. If yes, did you include a link to the pre-registration plan in the manuscript?
   2. If yes, were deviations from the pre-registration plan clearly indicated in the manuscript?

The statement should appear on a separate page, and all links should direct to active and anonymized websites. All of the aforementioned questions must be addressed in the statement (1, 2 and/or 3, 4, and 5), whether the answers are yes or no. Additional information may also be provided to explain specific conditions or circumstances. Example statements are as follows:

The analysis code (doi.xxxx) and materials (doi.xxxx) used in this manuscript are openly available. The raw data contained in this manuscript are not openly available due to privacy restrictions set forth by the institutional ethics board but can be obtained from the corresponding author following the completion of a privacy and fair use agreement. No aspects of the study were pre-registered.

The raw data, analysis code, and materials used in this study are not openly available but are available upon request to the corresponding author. The data collection and analysis were pre-registered (link to URL of pre-registration plan), and all deviations from the pre-registration plan were clearly indicated in the manuscript.

These are just examples, and authors are free to tailor the statements to their particular situation so long as they addressed criteria 1-5 listed above.

The content of the Transparency and Open Science Statement will not be used as a basis for acceptance or rejection of your manuscript.

2.5.3 Open Science Badges. Accepted manuscripts that answer in affirmative to #1, #4, or #5 above will be eligible to receive a corresponding Open Science Badge (see https://osf.io/tvyxz/). Open Science Badges will be affixed to the to the final version of the accepted article to signify the use of open and transparent practices. The following badges will be available:

 Open Data – The raw data used in the manuscript are freely available via a DOI or other persistent identifier.

 Open Materials – All study materials used in the manuscript are freely available via a DOI or other persistent identifier.

 Pre-registered + analysis – The study design and target analyses were pre-registered and the manuscript contains a link to a permanent, time-stamped, and uneditable pre-registration plan housed on an open science repository. The Open Science Framework (https://osf.io) is the preferred site for housing pre-registration plans, but authors are free to use similar alternatives. Importantly, use of pre-registered analysis plans does not preclude the inclusion of exploratory analyses, but rather formalizes the distinction between confirmatory and exploratory analyses. Emerging Adulthood only issues pre-registration badges for manuscripts that contain pre-registered analyses.

Authors will complete an Open Practices Disclosure Form upon acceptance of their manuscript for publication. Eligible badges will then be affixed to the final type-set version of the article.

2.6 Research Ethics and Patient Consent

All papers reporting animal and/or human studies must state in the methods section that the relevant ethics committee or institutional review board provided (or waived) approval. Please ensure that you have provided the full name and institution of the review committee, in addition to the approval number. For research articles, authors are also required to state in the methods section whether participants provided informed consent and whether the consent was written or verbal.

3. Publishing Policies

3.1 Publication ethics

SAGE is committed to upholding the integrity of the academic record. We encourage authors to refer to the Publication Ethics page on the SAGE Author Gateway.

3.1.1 Plagiarism

Teaching of Psychology and SAGE take issues of copyright infringement, plagiarism or other breaches of best practice in publication very seriously. We seek to protect the rights of our authors and we always investigate claims of plagiarism or misuse of published articles. Equally, we seek to protect the reputation of the journal against malpractice. Submitted articles may be checked with duplication-checking software. Where an article, for example, is found to have plagiarized other work or included third-party copyright material without permission or with insufficient acknowledgement, or where the authorship of the article is contested, we reserve the right to take action including, but not limited to: publishing an erratum or corrigendum (correction); retracting the article; taking up the matter with the head of department or dean of the author's institution and/or relevant academic bodies or societies; or taking appropriate legal action.

3.1.2 Prior publication

If material has been previously published it is not generally acceptable for publication in a SAGE journal. However, there are certain circumstances where previously published material can be considered for publication. Please refer to the guidance on the SAGE Author Gateway or if in doubt, contact the Editor at the address given below.

3.2 Contributor's publishing agreement

Before publication, SAGE requires the author as the rights holder to sign a Journal Contributor’s Publishing Agreement. SAGE’s Journal Contributor’s Publishing Agreement is an exclusive license agreement which means that the author retains copyright in the work but grants SAGE the sole and exclusive right and license to publish for the full legal term of copyright. Exceptions may exist where an assignment of copyright is required or preferred by a proprietor other than SAGE. In this case copyright in the work will be assigned from the author to the society. For more information please visit the SAGE Author Gateway.

3.3 Open access and author archiving

Teaching of Psychology offers optional open access publishing via the Sage Choice programme and Open Access agreements, where authors can publish open access either discounted or free of charge depending on the agreement with Sage. Find out if your institution is participating by visiting Open Access Agreements at Sage. For more information on Open Access publishing options at Sage please visit Sage Open Access. For information on funding body compliance, and depositing your article in repositories, please visit Sage’s Author Archiving and Re-Use Guidelines and Publishing Policies.

4. Preparing your manuscript for submission

4.1 Formatting

The preferred format for your manuscript is Word. LaTeX files are also accepted, visit Sage's Manuscript Submission Guidelines for the LaTex template. 

4.2 Structured Abstracts

At Teaching of Psychology, we ask authors to create a structured abstract when submitting to the journal. Structured abstracts benefit our readers in several ways. For instance, structured abstracts will standardize the way abstracts are written for ToP and will provide a guide for ToP authors in how to summarize the content of their manuscripts in a clear and concise manner. They will also be easier to read and access by others. Structured abstracts will enhance and streamline the search process for researchers to cite ToP articles.

There are two formats for a structured abstract, depending on the nature of the submission: Data driven papers and position papers. For position articles there is a maximum of 175 words and for data driven articles there is a maximum of 200 words per abstract. Below you will find the general format, explanation for each section (as described in brackets and different font color) for each type of abstract and two examples.

Data Driven Article Structured Abstract

                For these types of article submissions, please include (in this order) a section on the background, objective(s), method, results, conclusion, and teaching implications.

Abstract

Background: [A rationale for conducting the study. Possibly include the problem to be solved or the need to conduct the study.] Recent research suggests that designing a syllabus using learner-centered principles may increase students’ perceptions of their instructor on the characteristics of rapport, caring, helpfulness, willingness to seek help from the instructor, and student motivation.

Objective: [The purpose, research question, hypothesis or the main goal of the study.] The purpose of this study was to establish the extent to which peer-reviewed publish syllabi were designed using learner-centered principles.

Method: [A brief but detailed description of the procedures of the study. Include sample, measure, and how the study was executed.] Two raters coded 109 syllabi from Project Syllabus on the learner-center factors of community, power and control, and evaluation and assessment and measured the length of the syllabus in words and pages, year published, and number of images.

Results: [A brief description of what was found in the study. Possibly include whether the research question and/or hypotheses were confirmed or disconfirmed.] The syllabi were disproportionately learner-centered on most of the factors assessed. There were moderate to strong associations among learner-centered factors, syllabus length, and use of images in syllabi. Finally, syllabi have become increasingly more learner-centered over a 19-year period.

Conclusion: [Accounts for results, suggests explanations, points out things that may have been overlooked, and suggests areas for further research.] As demonstrated in this study, well designed and peer reviewed syllabi tend to be learner-centered, contain more detail, and use images.

Teaching Implications: [A suggestion on how to use the results of this study in any facet of teaching of psychology. May include practical applications or general suggestions.] To improve the rapport with students, teachers should consider revising their syllabi to incorporate more learner-centered principles, be more detailed, and use images where appropriate.

Abstract

Background: Social networking sites like Twitter enable people to be in constant contact and communication but their value in meeting educational objectives is less clear.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate whether using social media such as Twitter to deliver course content improved student’s test scores. 

Method: In a randomized between-subject design 63 students received an informative tweet containing course content or a humorous tweet about once per day. Students were then measured on their content knowledge using a cued-recall and recognition task at four separate times during the semester.

Results: On the cued-recall task, there were no differences between the two conditions. However, when comparing the recognition task (e.g., multiple choice test questions), students in the psychology content condition significantly outperformed students in the humor tweet condition.

Conclusion: The Twitter intervention appears to be an effective way to increase memory for important class concepts regardless of whether humor is used.

Teaching Implications: With the seeming ubiquity of social networking site usage among college students, integrating a means of learning within that information stream may be effective and beneficial method of delivering small amounts of content.

Position Article Structured Abstract

                For these types of article submissions, please include (in this order) a section on the introduction, statement of the problem, literature review, teaching implications, and conclusion.

An Annotated Example of a Structured Abstract for Position Papers

Dunn, D. S. (2008). Another view: In defense of vigor over rigor in classroom demonstrations. Teaching of Psychology, 35, 349-352. doi:10.1080/00986280802374039

Abstract

Introduction: [Provides insights into one or more themes in the state of the field of the scholarship of teaching and learning.] As the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) continues to gain respect as a formal type of research, more emphasize is understandably placed on empirical validation of our work, including classroom demonstrations.

Statement of the Problem: [Provides a specific issue that has arisen as the field has developed.] I worry that SoTL researchers will overlook activities and demonstrations that engages students and promotes a positive learning atmosphere, such as increased willingness to participate in classroom discussions.

Literature Review: [Contains an integrative review of the literature pertinent to the problem identified.] I review a number of published articles containing demonstrations without empirical validation of student learning outcomes, but that I have used in my own classes.

Teaching Implications: [Details how teachers can use the literature review to improve desirable student outcomes or otherwise improve their teaching and mentoring.] I point out and discuss reasons why some activities and demonstrations do not receive empirical validation. Furthermore, I consider the arguments against my suggestion for “vigor over rigor.”

Conclusion: [Explicates how the literature review and teaching implications advance the state of the scholarship of teaching and learning.] SoTL outlets can publish particularly novel and seemingly engaging activities and demonstrations without student learning outcomes. I discuss how vigor can be incorporated into the increasing “rigor” of SoTL work without blemishing the respect SoTL has been earning in recent years.

An Example of a Structured Abstract for a Position Paper

Bartsch, R. A., Bittner, W. M. E., & Moreno, J. E., Jr. (2008). A design to improve internal validity of assessments of teaching demonstrations. Teaching of Psychology, 35, 357-359. doi:10.1080/00986280802373809

Abstract

Introduction: Throughout higher education, there is an increasing need to assess student learning outcomes. Furthermore, there is an increasing need to conduct such assessments in a scientifically rigorous manner.

Statement of the Problem: It is often difficult to carry out internally valid assessments of student learning for a variety of reasons, such as difficulty obtaining an appropriate control group and using random assignment in a classroom setting.

Literature Review: Much published research assessing the effects of demonstrations on student learning has suffered from testing and measurement confounds. We introduce a potential design to ameliorate these problems: a one–group pretest–posttest design with alternative forms.

Teaching Implications: Using a one-group pretest-posttest design with alternative forms allows teachers to increase the internal validity of their assessments of learning demonstration, within the constraint of having a single class section.

Conclusion: Using the basic 2x2 between-subjects analysis-of-variance, teachers can assess the effectiveness of their classroom demonstrations and show external constituencies that their classroom demonstrations promote learning.

4.3 Artwork, figures and other graphics

For guidance on the preparation of illustrations, pictures and graphs in electronic format, please visit SAGE’s Manuscript Submission Guidelines.

4.4 Supplementary material

This journal is able to host additional materials online (e.g. datasets, podcasts, videos, images etc.) alongside the full text of the article. For more information please refer to our guidelines on submitting supplementary files.

4.5 Reference style

Teaching of Psychology adheres to the APA reference style (i.e., 7^th edition). View the APA guidelines to ensure your manuscript conforms to this reference style. All papers should be prepared in American English.

4.6 English language editing services

Authors seeking assistance with English language editing, translation, or figure and manuscript formatting to fit the journal’s specifications should consider using SAGE Language Services. Visit SAGE Language Services on our Journal Author Gateway for further information.

5. Submitting your manuscript

Teaching of Psychology is hosted on SAGE Track, a web based online submission and peer review system powered by ScholarOne™ Manuscripts. Visit https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ToP to login and submit your article online.

IMPORTANT: Please check whether you already have an account in the system before trying to create a new one. If you have reviewed or authored for the journal in the past year it is likely that you will have had an account created. For further guidance on submitting your manuscript online, please visit ScholarOne Online Help.

If a paper is not suitable for publication in Teaching of Psychology, we will inform the authors as soon as possible (usually within about 1 week after their submission). If the paper is generally suitable for Teaching of Psychology, we aim to provide an editor’s report based on at least two sets of reviewers’ comments within 12 weeks after their submission. Teaching of Psychology is published four times per year, and authors should not expect their paper to appear in the forthcoming issue subsequent to their submission being received.

5.1 ORCID

As part of our commitment to ensuring an ethical, transparent and fair peer review process, SAGE is a supporting member of ORCID, the Open Researcher and Contributor ID. ORCID provides a persistent digital identifier that distinguishes researchers from every other researcher and, through integration in key research workflows such as manuscript and grant submission, supports automated linkages between researchers and their professional activities ensuring that their work is recognized.

The collection of ORCID IDs from corresponding authors is now part of the submission process of this journal. If you already have an ORCID ID you will be asked to associate that to your submission during the online submission process. We also strongly encourage all co-authors to link their ORCID ID to their accounts in our online peer review Teaching of Psychology forms. It takes seconds to do: click the link when prompted, sign into your ORCID account and our systems are automatically updated. Your ORCID ID will become part of your accepted publication’s metadata, making your work attributable to you and only you. Your ORCID ID is published with your article so that fellow researchers reading your work can link to your ORCID profile and from there link to your other publications.

If you do not already have an ORCID ID please follow this link to create one or visit our ORCID homepage to learn more.

5.2 Information required for completing your submission

You will be asked to provide contact details and academic affiliations for all co-authors via the submission system and identify who is to be the corresponding author. These details must match what appears on your manuscript.

5.3 Permissions

Please also ensure that you have obtained any necessary permission from copyright holders for reproducing any illustrations, tables, figures or lengthy quotations previously published elsewhere. For further information including guidance on fair dealing for criticism and review, please see the Copyright and Permissions page on the SAGE Author Gateway.

6. On acceptance and publication

6.1 SAGE Production

Your SAGE Production Editor will keep you informed as to your article’s progress throughout the production process. Proofs will be sent by PDF to the corresponding author and should be returned promptly. Authors are reminded to check their proofs carefully to confirm that all author information, including names, affiliations, sequence and contact details are correct, and that Funding and Conflict of Interest statements, if any, are accurate. 

6.2 Online First publication

Online First allows final articles (completed and approved articles awaiting assignment to a future issue) to be published online prior to their inclusion in a journal issue, which significantly reduces the lead time between submission and publication. Visit the SAGE Journals help page for more details, including how to cite Online First articles.

6.3 Access to your published article

SAGE provides authors with online access to their final article.

6.4 Promoting your article

Publication is not the end of the process! You can help disseminate your paper and ensure it is as widely read and cited as possible. The SAGE Author Gateway has numerous resources to help you promote your work. Visit the Promote Your Article page on the Gateway for tips and advice.

7. SoTL Writing Workshop

The STP SoTL Workshop is designed to support faculty/graduate student members in receiving guidance on SoTL research from an experienced mentor and consult with both statistical and publication experts. Each participant is placed with a mentor and a team of 3-4 peers. Participants are supported in designing studies, analyzing learning data, and writing/revising a complete manuscript. Mentors work virtually with their teams starting in June and the experience culminates at the SoTL Workshop during the ACT Conference. Please refer to the STP website for more details http://teachpsych.org/SoTLWorkshop.

8. Further information

Any correspondence, queries or additional requests for information on the manuscript submission process should be sent to the Teaching of Psychology editorial office: top@teachpsych.org