Society for Judgment and Decision Making    European Association for Decision Making

Complete contents
Search articles
(Google search)

Issues
Vol. 15 (2020):  1  2
Vol. 14 (2019):  1  2  3  4  5  6
Vol. 13 (2018):  1  2  3  4  5  6
Vol. 12 (2017):  1  2  3  4  5  6
Vol. 11 (2016):  1  2  3  4  5  6
Vol. 10 (2015):  1  2  3  4  5  6
Vol. 9 (2014):  1  2  3  4  5  6
Vol. 8 (2013):  1  2  3  4  5  6
Vol. 7 (2012):  1  2  3  4  5  6
Vol. 6 (2011):  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8
Vol. 5 (2010):  1  2  3  4  5  6  7
Vol. 4 (2009):  1  2  3  4  5  6  7
Vol. 3 (2008):  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8
Vol. 2 (2007):  1  2  3  4  5  6
Vol. 1 (2006):  1  2

Citations
* RePEc (several formats, with each article)
* RIS for all articles (Endnote, etc.)


Indexed in
* PsycInfo;
* Econlit;
* EconPapers (RePEc);
* Google Scholar;
* Web of Science;
* Directory of Open Access Journals;
* Scopus;
* Airiti.

ISSN 1930-2975

We have signed the TOP guidelines.


For authors
* Technical guidelines
* Statistical advice
* Style advice
* Copyright
* Original proposal

Mirror Sites PA (US), PA (US), BC (CA), NJ (US), preserved in lockss

Get notified
* rss icon RSS feed
* Join the SJDM list
* Send me email

Judgment and Decision Making

This is the journal of the Society for Judgment and Decision Making (SJDM) and the European Association for Decision Making (EADM). It is open access, published on the World Wide Web, at least every two months. We have no author fees so far.

What we publish (and do not publish)

Submitted articles should be original1 and relevant to the tradition of research in the field represented by SJDM and EADM. Relevant articles deal with normative, descriptive, and/or prescriptive analyses of human judgments and decisions. These include, but are not limited to: experimental studies of judgments of hypothetical scenarios; experimental economic approaches to individual and group behavior; use of physiological methods to understand human judgments and decisions; discussion of normative models such as utility theory; and applications of relevant theory to medicine, law, consumer behavior, business, public choice, and public economics.

Types of articles: We publish articles of any length, including new empirical contributions, adversarial collaborations, informative replies to relevant articles, meta-analyses, and theoretical articles.

Replications: We publish replications, so long as they have a compelling rationale, e.g., the original results were surprising.

Registered reports: We will review the Introduction and Method section of proposed studies (plus something like a power analysis, if relevant). If these are accepted, then we promise to publish the results. The idea is to encourage risky but important studies (including replications) by removing the fear that a negative or ambiguous result will not be publishable. See the note2 for further details.

Theory specification papers (pilot phase): We publish manuscripts in which important (e.g., well researched and cited) and still underspecified theories of (mainly) other authors are specified. Papers should objectify theories by fully specifying and operationally defining all concepts included in the antecedence and the consequence parts of a theory and their interrelations. Such papers should foster debates that converge on a common understanding. Please contact the responsible editor (Andreas Glöckner) with a short proposal prior to writing the paper.

What we do not publish: We do not publish literature reviews unless they feature a theoretical contribution or represent a special point of view. We are not interested in applications of a decision analytic method to particular problems in commerce or other fields. Proposals for special issues will not be accepted for the time being.

Data and materials

We strongly encourage the submission of raw data (with a key to the meaning of variable names, if needed) and stimulus materials at the time of the initial submission and will often request these if they are not already submitted. Publications should, insofar as possible, include all key information necessary to understand (and replicate) the study and data analysis. Feel free to use footnotes, appendices, or supplements.

We include the data of accepted articles (or links to the data) with the articles, as well as stimuli, questionnaires, and code, when these are necessary to understand exactly what was done (insofar as this is consistent with other constraints such as questionnaires with copyright restrictions, or proprietary ownership of data).

Submission instructions

Send submissions to journal@sjdm.org. You may cc baron@upenn.edu. Comments and questions can go to either address. We do not expect a detailed cover letter summarizing the paper with a submission, gut we strongly recommend that you include this form, filled out as much as possible, in your email message (not separately) if possible. Some questions are relevant because articles published in JDM are now routinely replicated as part of a project on replication.

We now acknowledge receipt of submissions automatically. If you do not receive this acknowledgment, check your spam and then write baron@upenn.edu.

A submission must include a pdf version of the paper with figures and page numbers, and a text version (tex, text, doc, or docx without line numbers). Papers typically include complete author information, but you can omit that if you include it in your email. Reviewers prefer tables, figures, and footnotes in the text, not at the end.

Articles that violate the statistical guidelines may be sent back for revision before review. To avoid this problem, please check the guidelines before submission.

Accepted articles should meet these technical requirements. If you plan to submit an article, it helps to look at the technical requirements before you finish writing it. We strongly recommend our Overleaf template, our latex template (for latex users - it requires hevea.sty), or our Word template.

Article processing

Submitted articles are screened by an Editor and possibly by an Associate Editor before they are sent for review. This screening may involve checking the data. This process is designed to insure speedy rejection when rejection seems warranted.

Usually the review will involve one Consulting Editor and another reviewer. Informative reviews from earlier submissions of the same paper (with authors' responses to them) may reduce the number of required reviewers, thus speeding the review process and reducing the total burden on potential reviewers. We regard reviews as information, not votes.

Editorial Board

Editors

Jonathan Baron, University of Pennsylvania
Andreas Glöckner, University of Cologne

Associate Editors

Maya Bar-Hillel, Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Arndt Bröder, Universität Mannheim
Gretchen Chapman, Carnegie-Mellon University
Edward Cokely, University of Oklahoma
Michael DeKay, Ohio State University
Adele Diederich, Jacobs University
Kimmo Eriksson, Stockholm University
Shane Frederick, Yale University
Enrique Fatas, Loughborough University
Ben Hilbig, University of Koblenz-Landau
Joseph G. Johnson, Miami University of Ohio
Erin Krupka, University of Michigan
Michael Lee, University of California, Irvine
David R. Mandel, Defence Research and Development Canada
Barbara Mellers, University of Pennsylvania
Leif Nelson, University of California, Berkeley
Ganna Pogrebna, University of Birmingham
Briony Pulford, University of Leicester
Ilana Ritov, Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Ulrich Schmidt, Kiel Institute for the World Economy
Sandra Schneider, University of South Florida
Shaul Shalvi, University of Amsterdam
Will Skylark, University of Cambridge

Consulting Editors

Hal Arkes, Ohio State University
Netta Barak-Corren, Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Tilmann Betsch, University of Erfurt
Nicolao Bonini, University of Trento
Valerio Capraro, University of Middlesex
Clintin Davis-Stober, University of Missouri
Mandeep Dhami, Middlesex University
Catherine Eckel, Texas A&M University
Ido Erev, Technion, Israel Institute of Technology
Susann Fiedler, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods, Bonn
Gregory Fischer, Duke University
Craig Fox, University of California, Los Angeles
Andrew Gelman, Columbia University
Thomas Gilovich, Cornell University
Daniel Goldstein, Microsoft Research
Yaniv Hanoch, Southampton Business School
Ulrich Hoffrage, University of Lausanne
Konstantinos Katsikopoulos, University of Southampton and Harding Centre for Risk Literacy
Simon Kemp, University of Canterbury, N.Z.
Gideon Keren, Tilburg University
Kris Kirby, Williams College
Derek Koehler, University of Waterloo
David H. Krantz, Columbia University
Michal Król, University of Manchester
Shu Li, Chinese Academy of Sciences
Don Moore, University of California, Berkeley
Jeryl Mumpower, Texas A & M University
Ben Newell, University of New South Wales
Lisa Ordóñez, University of Arizona
Gordon Pennycook, University of Regina
Ellen Peters, University of Oregon
Antonio Rangel, California Institute of Technology
Adil Saribay, Boğaziçi University
Alan Schwartz, University of Illinois at Chicago
Barry Schwartz, University of California, Berkeley
Cass Sunstein, Harvard Law School
Peter Ubel, Duke University
Bettina von Helversen, University of Zurich
Eldad Yechiam, Technion, Israel Institute of Technology
Liane Young, Boston College

Supervisory committee

Derek Koehler, University of Waterloo (SJDM)
Christopher Hsee, University of Chicago (SJDM)
Ido Erev, Technion, Israel Institute of Technology (EADM)
Gaëlle Vallée-Tourangeau, Kingston University (EADM)


1An article cannot be previously published in a refereed journal. It can, however, be published in a conference proceedings, a personal web site, a working-paper series, or a pre-print server.

2A registered report is not the same as pre-registration, although that may be useful for many papers, including registered reports. See As Predicted. When submitting a registered report, please also include a separate explanation of why you are doing the study and why you want acceptance in advance. Following initial (pre-study) acceptance, authors are typically required by the action editor to register the approved protocol (e.g., on the Open Science Framework https://osf.io/rr/ or other recognised repository), either publicly or under private embargo until submission of the full manuscript with results. The full manuscript will then also contain the URL of the approved protocol.


Web page maintained by Jonathan Baron; image by Gaëlle Vallée-Tourangeau; additional software by Adam Kramer, Alan Schwartz, and Xiaohua Du. Main site hosted by the School of Arts and Sciences, University of Pennsylvania.