Instructions for authors

Submitting a proposal

The first step towards publication is to submit a proposal. This should contain as much information as possible about the measure, including:

Purpose

• Items and other components
• Development process
• Norm groups (age ranges, populations, other demographics)
• Reliability and validity
• Areas of application (age ranges and populations)
• Qualification or training requirements
• Competitor products and market need
• Status (has data been collected, is the manual manuscript complete, has the measure been submitted elsewhere)
• Author details and biography (including all research publications).

Please email your proposal. All proposals will be acknowledged within two weeks of submission.

Publication process

Publishing a high-quality psychometric measure requires a significant investment of time and resources by both publisher and author(s). Publication can take up to three years after a proposal has been accepted, and includes the full submission of a measure, review, development, copyediting, typesetting, design, production, launch, sales and marketing, and customer support.

Submission standards

Submissions are evaluated on the basis of the test review criteria set by the European Federation of Psychologists’ Associations (EFPA) and adopted by the British Psychological Society (BPS).

Whether your submission is accepted for publication partly depends on the extent to which the measure, manual, and evidence described in the manual satisfy the EFPA criteria. As a minimum, ‘sufficient’ evidence and data are needed for a measure to be readily applicable. In other words, the manual should contain the information that the experienced and informed administrator or psychologist would need in order to use and trust the measure. This includes, but is not limited to, the following:

The manual needs to demonstrate clear evidence of the psychometric properties of the measure, demonstrating the extent and strength of the underpinning research. Where an integral part of psychometric evidence (such as test-retest reliability) has not been examined, this must be justified. For example, use of a measure for development purposes, involving feedback that could influence retest results, is not a valid reason for omitting test–retest data during its construction; a separate data collection not including feedback on first administration would instead be needed.

Norms appropriate for the intended purposes of the measure should be provided and ready for use in order to enable norm-referenced assessment. Hogrefe may choose to update or collect additional data for the purpose of re-norming, expanding norms, or adding evidence identified as important only at a later stage.

User manuals should describe the measure as objectively as possible. They are not the place to ‘market’ the measure or convince the publisher or user that the measure is worth publishing or purchasing. Any claims made in the manual about the measure should be directly supported by empirical evidence and/or other good arguments. The value and psychometric integrity will be self-evident if the standard sections are completed comprehensively, so as to provide a thorough theoretical background and ties to the relevant substantive psychometric literature, as well as comprehensive evidence for the measure’s psychometric properties. Product manuals need to be fully supported by references to empirical data and examples from case studies.

Measures already subjected to peer review (e.g. used for research published in standard journal articles) but not previously published will generally have the best chance of publication or distribution through Hogrefe.

Electronic versions of our measures are administered online via the Hogrefe Testsystem, currently in its fifth version (HTS 5). Hogrefe developers require all the information necessary to implement a measure from first principles. Where such details are not supplied by the author(s), the publisher undertakes to consult the author(s) in good faith, but will have complete discretion to decide any details that are required to implement the measure in keeping with the provided material. Please consult our HTS implementation checklist while preparing your submission.

Submission style

Hogrefe publications follow the style guidelines set by the BPS. Manuals should adhere to the structure set out in this template.

General publication policies

• It is the author’s responsibility to check that all references to named people and/or organisations do not contain any libellous implications.
• Products are published on the understanding that the accuracy of the opinion, factual reporting, data, figures and illustrations therein is the responsibility of the author(s)

It is the author’s responsibility to acknowledge all material protected by copyright and legislation and to supply Hogrefe with written permission from the copyright holder (publisher/author) on submission of the manuscript. Hogrefe is to be informed in writing of any item that is restricted or currently awaiting confirmation of permission, including:

• Pictures
• Figures
• Texts (extracts or a series of extracts)
• Tables or edited tables taken from other published works; this includes work created by the author which was then assigned to a publisher other than Hogrefe
• A company or organisation on which a case study has been based
• References to products, software, trademarks or the reproduction of logos/emblems/insignias.

It is important that the author meets the contracted date for submission of the work, along with any other deadlines requested by the publishing department in the latter stages of the publishing process. All communication and queries should be responded to quickly and clearly to minimise delay to the publication date. Where there is more than one author, one author should be nominated as corresponding author with responsibility for all communication with Hogrefe, checking proofs etc.

For further information or for clarification of anything relating to Hogrefe’s publication process, please contact us.