SNIP measures contextual citation impact by weighting citations based on the total number of citations in a subject field.
SJR is a prestige metric based on the idea that not all citations are the same. SJR uses a similar algorithm as the Google page rank; it provides a quantitative and a qualitative measure of the journal’s impact.
The Impact Factor measures the average number of citations received in a particular year by papers published in the journal during the two preceding years.
© Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Reports 2015
To calculate the five year Impact Factor, citations are counted in 2014 to the previous five years and divided by the source items published in the previous five years.
© Journal Citation Reports 2015, Published by Thomson Reuters
The Journal of Experimental Social Psychology (JESP) aims to publish articles that extend or create conceptual advances in social psychology. As the title of the journal indicates, we are focused on publishing primary reports of research in social psychology that use experimental or quasi-experimental methods, although not every study in an article needs to be experimental. We also would like to encourage submissions explaining methodological or statistical considerations that are relevant to the kind of research published here, and that are usable by the typical person who carries out and evaluates social psychology research. Finally, we encourage authors to submit reports of replication studies in experimental social psychology that meet the high standards at JESP (for guidance, see Brandt, IJzerman et al., 2014).
The aim of these guidelines is to share with you some criteria that the journal’s editors employ when evaluating manuscripts. The guidelines cannot address all substantive issues, but we do want to emphasize that, unless its methods, theory and evidence are all exceptionally strong, typically one research study leaves many questions unanswered and this is an important reason why papers that include more than one study are preferred by JESP editors.
JESP editors start from an attitude that is positive about efforts to advance the field, but rigorous in terms of evaluating evidence supporting a submitted paper’s conclusions. With this attitude in mind the following points may help authors to decide what points to address when preparing their manuscripts for JESP.
The guidelines also reflect the editors’ experiences with having to reject papers, or engage authors in lengthy and uncertain revisions, for the reasons mentioned below. Thus, the guidelines aim to spell out some basics in order to let authors know what kind of methods and reporting choices will give them the best chance at a favourable evaluation at JESP.
Please review the guidelines here.