Reviewer Guidelines

To enhance the caliber of articles published in Psyhealthica: Journal of Health Psychology, we warmly invite qualified experts to join our reviewer team. Your insights and feedback are crucial for maintaining the journal’s high academic standards.

Eligibility Criteria

  • Possess a Master’s or Doctoral degree.
  • Specialize in health psychology and/or positive psychology.
  • Have solid experience reviewing scholarly manuscripts.
  • Have authored articles in internationally recognized journals that have received citations.

Key Points for Manuscript Assessment

  1. Overall Presentation
  • Does the paper offer a logical, coherent argument?
  • Are the ideas articulated clearly?
  1. Writing Quality
  • Is the title aligned with the content?
  • Is the prose concise, readable, and well-structured?
  1. Length and Structure:
  • Which sections need expansion, condensation, removal, or merging?
  1. Title
  • Is it brief, precise, and engaging while accurately reflecting the content?
  1. Abstract
  • Does it cover five essential elements—background, objective, method, findings, and contributions/implications?
  1. Introduction
  • Clearly states the research gap and study background.
  • Provides a relevant literature review that frames the research questions
  • Highlights the study’s originality.
  • States objectives in concise narrative form.
  • If quantitative, develops hypotheses grounded in theory, expressed (where possible) as one-tailed predictions.
  1. Method
  • Describes all procedures in detail beyond mere definitions.
  • Identifies variables, participants, instruments (including names, item counts, reliability coefficients).
  • Explains data-analysis techniques.
  • Supplies enough detail to enable replication and inform future research.
  1. Results
  • Presents processed data—tables, charts, or figures with explanatory text.
  • Ensures findings answer the research questions or hypotheses.
  1. Discussion
  • Interprets results in relation to prior findings and current literature
  • Explains the significance and implications of the study.
  • Acknowledges strengths and limitations without duplicating the Results section.
  1. Conclusion
  • Summarizes the principal outcomes in clear, well-constructed sentences
  • Synthesizes key findings from the analysis and discussion
  • Emphasizes novel contributions to the field of psychology.

Your thorough and constructive evaluations will directly contribute to the integrity and scholarly impact of our journal. Thank you for lending your expertise.