The year in review

At the end of 2011, Professor Patrick Heaven retired as editor of the AJP after five years in the role. I would like to thank Patrick for the time and energy that he put into the journal. He worked tirelessly to improve its standard, and he proved very successful at achieving this goal as demonstrated in various bibliometric indices. The impact factor metrics for the AJP released in July indicate that the 2 years impact factor for the AJP was 1.078, which is a substantial increase over earlier years. The AJP now ranks 55th out of 124 journals in the multidisciplinary category. This is a very good achievement given that the category includes not only the top generalist journals such as the Annual Review of Psychology, Psychological Bulletin, and Psychological Review but also specialist journals such as Psychosomatic Medicine, Aggressive Behavior, and Psychology of Women Quarterly. A more relevant comparison is with other national generalist journals such as the American Journal of Psychology (53rd), British Journal of Psychology (21st), Canadian Journal of Psychology (40th), European Psychologist (46th), South African Journal of Psychology (93rd), Spanish Journal of Psychology (72nd), and the Swiss Journal of Psychology (84th). Relative to population size, the AJP would appear to be doing very well in this arena, and I am hopeful that we will be able to continue the improvement in the impact factor in the coming year.

The first issue of the AJP this year was a special issue guest‐edited by Stephan Lewandowsky and Max Coltheart. In this issue the ‘divergences and synergies between the different levels of explanation for behavioural phenomena offered by purely cognitive and purely neuroscientific approaches’ (Lewandowsky & Coltheart, 2012, p. 3) are examined. The papers by Coltheart (2012), Lewandowsky, Ecker, Farrell, and Brown (2012), Kalish and Dunn (2012), and Newell (2012) highlight the deficiencies of the cognitive neuroscience explanations of human behaviour relative to the cognitive modelling approach. On the other hand, Brown (2012) and de Zubicaray (2012) highlight the benefits of the neuroscientific approaches and Perfors (2012) suggests that the relative maturity of the two fields may partially explain the disagreement about the value of the two approaches.

Of the other articles published in 2012, one of particular interest is that of Cumming, Fidler, Kalinowski, and Lai (2012), who wrote on the statistical recommendations that appear in the latest edition of the American Psychological Association Publication Manual. It surprises me how many authors and academics appear not to know about the changes that have occurred in the manual, and hopefully this article will help rectify that situation. The article will also be an excellent resource for students. As is to be expected with a generalist journal, the other articles published in 2012 cover a broad range of topics. The most frequently covered areas were cognition and perception (Balzan, Delfabbro, & Galletly, 2012; Eidels, 2012; Fajfar, Campitelli, & Labollita, 2012; Ramm & Halford, 2012; Rashidi, Pazhoohi, & Hosseinchari, 2012), psychometric issues (Dacre Pool & Qualter, 2012; Marks, Blore, Hine, & Dear, 2012; Rose, Hands, & Larkin, 2012; Thomas, McGrath, & Skilbeck, 2012), and clinical‐related topics (Gagnon & Hasking, 2012; Harris & Cranney, 2012; Jakymin & Harris, 2012; Mond & Arrighi, 2012; Smets, Luyckx, Wessel, & Raes, 2012; Williams, 2012). Other areas covered were social psychology and individual differences (Croy, Gerrans, & Speelman, 2012; Furnham & Moutafi, 2012), organisational psychology (Philp, Egan, & Kane, 2012), health (Borschmann, Lines, & Cottrell, 2012), and cross‐cultural differences (Wong, Jenvey, & Lill, 2012).

To conclude, I would like to express my thanks to all those who in some way contribute to making the AJP a successful journal. Without the submission of high‐quality manuscripts by authors, and the time and effort of academics who review these manuscripts, there would be no AJP. I am especially grateful to the associate editors of the AJP for their commitment and dedication. Without their input and support, my job would be impossible.