Editors\u27 Notes

Editors\u27 Notes: Volume 35, Issue

Publishing in a Peer-Reviewed Journal

In our first installment of a series of short articles, we focus on demystifying the publishing process. We first review terminology that is important for authors to understand yet is not clearly defined in easily accessible ways. Then, we describe the publishing process, beginning with preparing and submitting a manuscript, and ending with either publication or a recommendation to submit to another outlet. We provide a visual flowchart to illustrate the steps and multiple pathways in this process. Finally, we present the advice we collected from eight individuals involved in the publication process at MWER: the two current editors and one past editor, along with several associate editors and members of the MWER editorial board. We summarize descriptions of the indicators of submission quality they identified, which included cohesion (i.e., the fit between the various sections of the paper); a comprehensive, transparent, and well-developed methods section; and appropriate, recent literature in sync with the field, among others. We also categorize and describe their advice for those new to the publication process, such as ways to usefully process reviewer feedback and strategies to maximize journal fit

Social Consequences of Breaking Online Emotional Display Rules: A Mixed-Methods Study in Partnership with African American Adolescent Males

The advent of social media has introduced a powerful new context for emotional development, which is particularly important for adolescents. Emotional development is especially active and susceptible to peer influences during adolescence, and by 2014, almost all U.S. teens reported using social media. Building a knowledge base about adolescents’ emotional lives online could inform practice in ways that improve outcomes for youth, but research on emotional interactions via social media is in its infancy. This mixed-methods, exploratory taxonomy development study first qualitatively explored how African American adolescent boys defined emotional display rules online, and then used experimental methods to investigate the perceived social consequences of breaking these display rules. A total of 50 adolescents (mean age = 15.8) participated; of these, 10 acted as youth research partners who engaged in focus groups to help design research materials and interpret results, and 40 others engaged in experimental procedures and individual interviews. Through inductive qualitative analysis, we developed a taxonomy of emotional display rules around anger, sadness, embarrassment, and excitement. Some particularly salient display rules centered on anger. For example, one emergent display rule was: expressions of anger that are violent in nature are not socially acceptable. Results from the within-subjects experiment using simulated social media interactions suggest that youth perceive social consequences for fictional characters who broke display rules. Ratings of likeability were significantly different among four characters; the emotionally neutral was the most liked character, whereas youth rated the three characters who violated specific display rules significantly lower. The character who violated the anger display rule received the lowest ratings. Characters who violated display rules also garnered less sympathy when they posted about the death of a friend, and participants’ response intentions to these posts differed among characters. Findings suggest that breaking certain online emotional display rules can harm peer relationships. With knowledge about the nature and consequences of African American adolescent boys’ emotional interactions via social networking sites, adults across developmental settings (e.g., school and after school programs) will be positioned to help youth become more intentional about online expressions and responses

Making the Most of the Peer Review Process

In this brief mentoring corner article, we focus on defining what different editorial decisions mean (e.g., accept with revisions; revise and resubmit; reject: revise and resubmit), discussing factors you might consider when deciding what to do after receiving a decision (e.g., resubmit or move on) and considering how to best approach the revisions. We also provide guidance on effective communication with editors, including an example of a successful response to review table and cover letter

Editors\u27 Notes

Editors\u27 Note

Interrupting the Pattern: Knowing Why and Respecting Who We Teach

Although research has identified culturally responsive pedagogy (CRP) as vitally important for educators in today’s increasingly diverse classrooms, few studies exist to explore the development of both pre- and in-service teachers’ knowledge about and self efficacy for CRP. This mixed methods study examined pre- and in-service teachers’ perceptions of CRP as well as their CRP self-efficacy. Both pre-service and in-service teachers participated in professional development aimed at improved knowledge and self-efficacy for CRP. Dependent-samples t-tests revealed positive and statistically significant changes in participants’ CRP self-efficacy. Qualitative analyses demonstrated participants worked to better understand their core values (know why they teach), identified a need to better understand their students (respect who they teach), and recognized high expectations for all students as a core principle of CRP

Editors\u27 Notes

Editors\u27 Note

Editors\u27 Notes

Editors\u27 Note

Editors\u27 Notes

Editors\u27 Note