Current developments in policies, priorities and personnel

Abstract

Data on the recent operation and content of the Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology (JOOP) are reviewed and conclusions drawn about the journal and the current state of the field. The benefits of contextualizing research and of strengthening the links between research and practice are discussed. Recommendations to authors, and new elements of JOOP policy and procedure, are outlined. These should be read alongside the earlier editorial statement (Arnold, 2004).

Editorial: Changes in EJWOP and plans for the future

“…At that time, the proposed goal to be achieved within the next four years was an average turn-around time for peer-reviewed papers of 75 days. This figure seemed to be a reasonable goal considering the statistics shown by other journals in our field (e.g., Arnold, 2007). Furthermore, we have also revised and updated the indicators about the journal's operation, and we have proposed new ones.…”

Further developments in the Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology

“…The March or June 2008 issue of JOOP will see a follow-up to the lively debate on the scientist practitioner divide initiated by Garry Gelade last year (Gelade, 2006a,b) and joined by Toby Wall (2006), Gillian Symon (2006), Gerard Hodgkinson (2006), andNeil Anderson (2007). As indicated in my previous editorial (Arnold, 2007), JOOP will periodically publish invited papers on how recent JOOP output looks from a practitioner perspective -with the author given free rein to say what he or she likes. I am delighted to say that Alan Walker of East Carolina University, USA, has agreed to do this, and I am confident that his observations will be considered informative by people on both sides of the so-called divide.…”

“…In the months since my editorial earlier this year (Arnold, 2007), there have been some more developments in JOOP that I would like to bring to the attention of our readers.…”